MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018292075 · doi:10.12927/cjnl.2012.22732

Leadership for Health System Transformation: What's Needed in Canada? Brief for the Canadian Nurses Association's National Expert Commission on The Health of Our Nation – The Future of Our Health System

2012· article· en· W2018292075 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Raquel M. Meyer, Susan VanDeVelde‐Coke, Karima Velji

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing leadership · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommissionPolitical scienceAssociation (psychology)Healthcare systemNursingMedicinePsychologyHealth careLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What Is ACEn?The Academy of Canadian Executive Nurses represents the voice of nursing leadership in Canada.Founded over 30 years ago, ACEN is now a network of nurses in executive and leadership positions in healthcare, education, research, government, and health and nursing associations.ACEN provides a forum for nurse executives to deal with unique challenges and a network to influence federal policies on several health-related subjects in the interest of better healthcare for Canadians.ACEN would be pleased to collaborate with the CNA's National Expert Commission and other key stakeholders to support and implement emerging recommendations in our organizations and regions and at the national level. Canadian Values and the Leadership ImperativeCanada's healthcare system is fundamental to Canadian culture and identity.Canadians strongly support the Canada Health Act's principles of administration, comprehensiveness, universality, portability and accessibility and are concerned about the long-term sustainability and accountability of our healthcare system (Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada 2002).

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.887
Threshold uncertainty score0.820

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0240.006
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0130.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.299
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.122 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing leadershipSame topicPrimary Care and Health OutcomesFrench-language works237,207