MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998110473 · doi:10.1097/jnn.0b013e3181e26be6

Development and Implementation of an Adolescent Epilepsy Transition Clinic

2010· article· en· W1998110473 on OpenAlexaffabout
Laura Jurasek, Lynne Ray, D. Gavin Quigley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience Nursing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsStollery Children's HospitalUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Alberta Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpilepsyHealth careAdult careNursingMedicineTransition (genetics)MEDLINEPsychologyFamily medicinePsychiatryYoung adultGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes the collaborative development of a nurse-led transition clinic within the Comprehensive Epilepsy Program at the Stollery Children's Hospital and at the University of Alberta Hospital. Developed in 2005, our program has been instrumental in assisting 97 teens and their parents' transition from pediatric to adult epilepsy care. Through our Adolescent Epilepsy Transition Clinic, we address concerns expressed by teens and their parents when shifting from pediatric to adult healthcare services, including fear of the unknown, change in appointment location, loss of established relationships, and anticipated decrease in the quality of care posttransition. We also address concerns of adult and pediatric healthcare providers related to the adolescents' working knowledge of how their particular type of epilepsy and its management interact with typical adolescent developmental challenges and future career and lifestyle choices. The results from a process evaluation are presented and offer new insights for improving adolescent transition.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.388 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations88
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuroscience NursingSame topicAdolescent and Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207