A generative response to palliative service capacity in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This paper situates a large-scale learning and service development capacity-building initiative for hospice palliative care services within the current Canadian policy context for use by international readers. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: In 2000 a national initiative using action research as its design was crafted to support continuing professional development and knowledge management in primary-health care environments. FINDINGS: The Canadian health policy context is complex and requires innovative solutions to achieve desired changes in response to emerging population health demands for quality end-of-life care. Employment of educational and social science constructs, including complexity theory, communities of practice, transformative learning theory, and workplace learning methods, has proven helpful in supporting the creation of national capacity for hospice palliative care. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: There is a significant contribution for social scientists to make in aiding a better understanding of the complexity in health systems. At the same time, an aging population in industrial countries demands more active engagement of legal and bioethical scholars in a range of emerging policy and legislative questions about quality end-of-life care. Educational research is also required to understand better and reform curricula to prepare an emerging generation of health science practitioners for the demands of an aging population. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Changing health service delivery environments demand rethinking of the knowledge and skills leaders require to influence desired change. A broader understanding of where and how learning takes place is essential for enhancing the quality of patient care. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The Pallium Project represents a generative response to facilitating learning and building longer-term system capacity. The journey of project development to date illustrates some important lessons that can be adopted from hospice palliative care to inform other primary-health care initiatives, including, potentially, mental health, cardiology, diabetes, geriatrics, where productive change can result from productively linking specialists and primary-care colleagues.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.000 |
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.
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".