<i>Tomorrow's Challenges –Today's Realities</i> Making the Leap: 2002 Ryley-Jeffs Memorial Lecture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The premise of the presentation is a challenge to health care providers to examine the quality of services currently provided in health care facilities across the country. While the Canadian health care system is under scrutiny with numerous reviews and commissions, the underlying question is: are the structural changes making a difference? We need to consider the recommendations in the latest report from the Institute of Medicine, Crossing the Quality Chasm. The report calls for a sweeping redesign and suggests a set often new rules to guide patient/clinician relationships. Dietitians must take the lead on implementation of systematic changes, model the way and get involved in the necessary changes. As the report suggests, the gap between where we are and where we need to go in providing quality health care services is not just a crack, it is in fact a chasm.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.009 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".