COMMUNITY PERCEPTION OF RURAL HOSPITAL CONVERSION/CLOSURE: RE-CONCEPTUALISING AS A CRITICAL INCIDENT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In this article, a consideration of the role and meaning of the rural hospital is contextualised within the health reform environment in Saskatchewan (Canada). Individual and community perceptions of the impact of the conversion/closure of a rural hospital are often unheard and more often unheeded. Some researchers suggest hospital conversion/closure is a devastating event in the life of rural communities, yielding long-lasting medical, economic and psychological consequences. METHOD: This article examines the concept of critical incidents with the intent of proposing a working definition of the concept. Lazarus and Folkman's (1984) construct of appraisal provides the framework for discussion and re-conceptualisation of critical incidents. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The recommendation is to consider the adoption of an alternate definition of critical incident shifting away from professional or external delineation of an event's meaning. The proposed definition states that a critical incident is any external event that alters an individual's or community's life from the perspective of that individual or community. Finally, the conversion/closure of a rural hospital is considered within this re-conceptualised 'critical incident' definition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".