MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030511551 · doi:10.5737/1181912x1611117

Implementing the role of patient-navigator nurse at a university hospital centre

2006· article· en· W2030511551 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Oncology Nursing Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsHôtel-Dieu de QuébecCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecMichel-SarrazinUniversité Laval
FundersCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec
KeywordsPsychosocialOncology nursingMedicineOncologyNursingAdaptation (eye)Internal medicinePsychologyNurse education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A profile of the role and functions of an oncology patient-navigator nurse (OPN) and the preliminary phases to implementing this role within a team specializing in oncology are first presented. This is followed by a qualitative study that provides a descriptive assessment for implementing an initial OPN in the head and neck oncology area of a university hospital centre (UHC) with a supraregional model for oncology. Three groups of stakeholders (individuals with cancer and families, caregivers, network partners) were interviewed on three occasions: before, during and after implementation. The results show that this new role can be integrated within a team specializing in oncology. The beneficial effects of this role on the process of adaptation to illness, interdisciplinary work and continuity of care are described. Several recommendations are formulated, one being the importance of situating the implementation process from an organizational change perspective.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.604
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.254 · 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