MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004840437 · doi:10.1258/095148406777888080

Integrated service networks: the Quebec case

2006· review· en· W2004840437 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Services Management Research · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
FundersInstitut National de Santé Publique du Québec
KeywordsTypologyIntegrated careContext (archaeology)Service (business)Health careHealth servicesProcess managementKnowledge managementBusinessManagement scienceSociologyMarketingComputer scienceEngineeringEconomic growthEconomicsPopulationGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the current context of health-care reform, integrated service networks are presented as main solutions to enhance efficiency. During the past few years, there has been an abundance of literature focusing on integration and the underlying implementation issues. However, the concept of integrated service networks remains fluid, and there are few typologies on health-care inter-organizational relations. The Quebec health-care system offers fertile ground for furthering our understanding of this concept because of its public system of funding, its integration of health and social missions, and the present reform's state of development. On the basis of a review of the literature and empirical studies, this article intends to clarify the concept of integrated service networks. A typology of inter-organizational relations and the main parameters for organizing integrated service networks are presented. The article also discusses the effectiveness of integration models.

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)0.072
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0720.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.009

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 head0.592
GPT teacher head0.563
Teacher spread0.029 · 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