MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983497705 · doi:10.1017/s2045796012000212

Translating knowledge to practice: optimizing the use of guidelines

2012· review· en· W1983497705 on OpenAlexaff
Anna R. Gagliardi

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental health careGuidelineMental healthHealth careMEDLINEMedicineNursingPsychologyPsychiatryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Guidelines support health care decision-making but continue to be underused, therefore more research is needed on how they can be better developed and implemented. The same is true of mental health care, for which there is recent growing interest in improving care delivery and associated outcomes by optimizing the use of mental health care guidelines. This editorial describes the key concepts from accumulated research on guideline implementation to suggest a number of avenues for research on implementation of mental health care guidelines.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.074
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.934

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.074
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.828
GPT teacher head0.651
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations22
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiology and Psychiatric SciencesSame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207