MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964658228 · doi:10.1108/09526860110391612

How service users become empowered in human service organizations: the empowerment model

2001· review· en· W1964658228 on OpenAlexaff
Michael J. Holosko, Donald R. Leslie, D. Rosemary Cassano

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperationalizationEmpowermentProcess managementBusinessService (business)Knowledge managementHuman servicesProcess (computing)Service designService delivery frameworkComputer scienceMarketingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents an empowerment model (EM) to be used by service users in human service organizations (HSOs). The EM is a structure for service user input to be integrated within the HSO at various administrative levels through a four-step sequential process. The article fills a distinct void in the literature as there are numerous accounts about the importance of empowerment, but few on processes that need to be defined to operationalize the concept. Implications are directed toward administrators as they need to take leadership in implementing the EM in order to deliver more efficient and relevant services to their clients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.173
GPT teacher head0.530
Teacher spread0.357 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Health Care Quality AssuranceSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207