MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986380546 · doi:10.1177/000841740707400309

The Reform of Home Care Services in Ontario: Opportunity Lost or Lesson Learned?

2007· article· en· W1986380546 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Glen E. Randall

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingPsychologyMedical educationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: With the release of the Romanow Commission report, Canadian governments are poised to consider the creation of a national home care program. If occupational and physical therapists are to have input in shaping such a program, they will need to learn from lost opportunities of the past. PURPOSE: This paper provides an overview of recent reforms to home care in Ontario with an emphasis on rehabilitation services. METHOD: Data were collected from documents and 28 key informant interviews with rehabilitation professionals. RESULTS: Home care in Ontario has evolved in a piecemeal manner without rehabilitation professionals playing a prominent role in program design. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Rehabilitation services play a critical role in facilitating hospital discharges, minimizing readmissions, and improving the quality of peoples' lives. Canadians will benefit if occupational and physical therapists seize the unique opportunity before them to provide meaningful input into creating a national home care program.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.803
Threshold uncertainty score0.931

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0080.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.371
GPT teacher head0.510
Teacher spread0.139 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicOccupational Therapy Practice and ResearchFrench-language works237,207