MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992537239 · doi:10.1177/1545109710370486

What Do People Living With HIV/AIDS Expect From Their Physicians? Professional Expertise and the Doctor-Patient Relationship

2010· article· en· W1992537239 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the International Association of Physicians in AIDS Care · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPatient Dignity and Privacy
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerspective (graphical)Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Statutory lawFamily medicineQualitative researchNursingHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative study identifies the types of professional expertise that physicians are seen to possess in clinical encounters from the perspective of people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA). Respondents looked to their physicians for expert knowledge in 3 key areas: medical/clinical; legal/statutory; and ethical/moral. Physicians were seen to be authorities in each of these areas and their judgments, though not always agreed with, were taken seriously and influenced the health care decisions made by PLWHA. The authority that comes with professional expertise in each of the areas identified was experienced both positively and negatively by PLWHA. Understanding the expectations of patients in the medical encounter can assist physicians in providing optimal care in the management of HIV/AIDS.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.252 · 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