MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016154893 · doi:10.1258/hsmr.2009.009002

Chronic disease management and the home-care alternative in Ontario, Canada

2009· article· en· W2016154893 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Services Management Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careSustainabilityBusinessDisease managementMedicineNursingInvestment (military)Health policyPublic healthEconomic growthPolitical scienceHealth management systemAlternative medicineEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pressure on our health-care system to deliver efficient, quality and cost-effective care is increasing. The debate on its sustainability is also expanding. These challenges can be managed with revisions to our health-care policy frameworks governing how and what public health-care services are delivered. Chronic disease management and home care can together ease many of the present and future pressures facing the health-care system. However, the current level of investment and the present policy are not effectively supporting movement in this direction. Updating the Canada Health Act to reflect the realities of our health-care system, and developing policies to support the areas of interdisciplinary teamwork and system integration are needed to facilitate chronic disease management and home care in Canada. This article lays out the challenges, highlights the impending issues and suggests a framework for moving forward.

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)0.015
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.212
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.232 · 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