MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966193808 · doi:10.1177/1084822314536906

Measuring Home Care Caseloads

2014· article· en· W1966193808 on OpenAlexaffabout
Barbara Collister, Carol Ann Slauenwhite, Kimberly D. Fraser, Signe Swanson, Andrew Fong

Bibliographic record

VenueHome Health Care Management & Practice · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsAlberta HealthUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScale (ratio)Matching (statistics)Work (physics)Process (computing)Resource (disambiguation)Operations managementComputer scienceNursingProcess managementMedicineBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In response to caseloads that are increasing in numbers and acuity, Alberta Health Services developed the Caseload Intensity Tool (CIT). The development and testing process led to a valid and reliable tool that connects client clinical condition to clinician response. The CIT allows clinicians to discriminate between levels of client intensity quickly and accurately. The scores for each client are summarized first into a client intensity scale and then a caseload intensity scale. The CIT can facilitate caseload management including matching client needs to resources and improving staff resource management, for example, equitable caseloads. There is potential for the tool to validate the relatively invisible work of case managers making it understandable, measurable, and defensible during times of rising costs and budget restraint.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHome Health Care Management & PracticeSame topicPrimary Care and Health OutcomesFrench-language works237,207