MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970472011 · doi:10.3917/riges.393.0116

La démarche Lean en santé et services sociaux au Québec : comment mesurer la maturité des établissements ?

2014· article· fr· W1970472011 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueGestion · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicQuality and Supply Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article présente le modèle mis au point pour apprécier la maturité d’un établissement de santé et de services sociaux dans le déploiement du Lean ainsi que l’architecture et les bases conceptuelles qui soutiennent ce modèle. En plus du modèle, une grille d’appréciation destinée aux établissements a été conçue par le Pôle santé HEC Montréal et la Chaire interdisciplinaire de recherche et d’intervention dans les services de santé (Chaire IRISS) de l’Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières. Le cadre conceptuel et la méthodologie de recherche utilisée pour établir les volets et les composantes retenues de même que la déclinaison des niveaux de maturité sont décrits. L’article discute aussi l’usage de l’outil d’appréciation élaboré par les équipes de direction qui désirent orienter leur action dans leur démarche de déploiement du Lean.

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.265 · 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