MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996605459 · doi:10.1016/j.pmedr.2014.11.005

The relevance of positive approaches to health for patient-centered care medicine

2014· article· en· W1996605459 on OpenAlexaff
Mathieu Roy, Mélanie Levasseur, Yves Couturier, Bengt Lindström, Mélissa Généreux

Bibliographic record

VenuePreventive Medicine Reports · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, psychology, and well-being
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeHealth and Social Services Centre University Institute of Geriatrics of Sherbrooke
FundersPrinceton Center for Complex Materials
KeywordsOperationalizationRelevance (law)Health carePerspective (graphical)MedicineMEDLINENursingPsychologyComputer sciencePolitical scienceEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last centuries, the field of medicine has evolved from a disease-oriented model where individuals were seen as simple hosts for diseases, to a patient-centered approach where health professionals actively try to engage their patients in treatment decision-making. This deep change in models of care acknowledges that patients are important actors in health fulfillment. Even though this change in models of care was a major step forward for medical practices and treatment success, patient-centered care medicine (PCCM) has brought its own limitations. In this brief comment, the concept of PCCM will be defined and the benefits of this model of care will be highlighted. The limitations inherent to PCCM will also be summarized. A discussion on how PCCM can move forward will be undertaken using evidence-based knowledge on positive approaches to health. Finally, an encompassing perspective (i.e. the salutogenic perspective) will il lustrate how the PCCM model of care can help to operationalize major health conceptual frameworks worldwide.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.729
Threshold uncertainty score0.748

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.325 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations16
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreventive Medicine ReportsSame topicHealth, psychology, and well-beingFrench-language works237,207