MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cancer Patients' Satisfaction With Care in Traditional and Innovative Ambulatory Oncology Clinics

2008· article· en· W2015314005 on OpenAlexaff
Shannon L. Groff, Linda E. Carlson, Kathy Tsang, Barbara J. Potter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Care Quality · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Satisfaction in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbulatoryConfidentialityPatient satisfactionAmbulatory careCancerFamily medicineMedicineNursingPsychologyHealth careInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the effects of environmental changes, such as rearranging the seating area, playing soft music, and displaying scenes of nature, on aspects of patient satisfaction, ranging from satisfaction with the physical environment and wait times to continuity of care, confidentiality, and trust in providers. Patients receiving care in a new, innovative cancer center had significantly higher satisfaction scores on the physical environment and wait time subscales than the patients receiving care in an older, traditional center. However, the 2 centers did not differ on any of the other satisfaction subscales. Implications of these findings are discussed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.225
GPT teacher head0.530
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 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

Citations23
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Care QualitySame topicPatient Satisfaction in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207