MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1973350718 · doi:10.1016/j.hcmf.2014.08.005

Clinical Integration: A Burning Platform

2014· letter· en· W1973350718 on OpenAlexaff
Katherine Chubbs

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2014
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Policy and Management
Canadian institutionsSt. John’s Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSystem integrationHealth careInvestment (military)Healthcare systemBusinessDelivery systemHealthcare deliveryProcess managementMedical emergencyRisk analysis (engineering)Operations managementComputer scienceMedicineEngineeringEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The growing burden of healthcare cost demands a change in healthcare delivery. Hospitals must be reserved for those requiring specialized acute services that can only be received in such a setting. Investment must be made in alternative delivery models, beginning with the home and community as the primary environments in which to receive care. Through focusing on clinical integration, the system will be moving towards better care. System integration enables this burning platform.

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)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.120
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.120
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.023
Scholarly communication0.0210.027
Open science0.0050.021
Research integrity0.0890.096
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.008

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management Forum→Same topicHealthcare Policy and Management→French-language works237,207→