MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972911781 · doi:10.1093/geront/gnt053

The Relevance of Marjory Warren's Writings Today

2013· article· en· W1972911781 on OpenAlexaff
Philip St. John, David B. Hogan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Gerontologist · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaHealth Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeriatricsSpecialtyMultidisciplinary approachRelevance (law)GerontologyMedicineConsistency (knowledge bases)Hospital medicinePsychologyFamily medicinePsychiatrySociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Marjory Warren was one of the initial geriatricians in the United Kingdom. She established specialized geriatric units, held important administrative positions, and wrote influential papers where she argued for the need of the specialty of geriatric medicine and outlined principles for inpatient care of older adults with chronic illness. We compare and contrast Warren's early papers describing these principles with contemporary models for improving inpatient care of older adults and the need for the specialty of geriatrics. Warren's writings on the inpatient care of older adults presage the principles of both Hospital Elder Life Programs and Acute Care of the Elderly units. The importance of multidisciplinary teams, the physical environment, attention to diverse issues (medical, social, functional), early ambulation, and the active involvement of the older person in their daily routine are present in Warren's writings and in contemporary approaches. Warren's arguments for both the specialty of geriatric medicine and increased training of nonspecialist physicians and other health professionals are remarkably similar to those made in a recent Institute of Medicine report. Across time and place, there has been consistency in the general principles perceived as required for the effective cares of older persons, but challenges persist in implementing and sustaining them.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.305 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations26
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe GerontologistSame topicAging and Gerontology ResearchFrench-language works237,207