MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032940942 · doi:10.1097/qmh.0b013e31825e87a2

How to Build High-Quality Interprofessional Collaboration and Education in Your Hospital

2012· article· en· W2032940942 on OpenAlex
Kathryn Parker, Adina Jacobson, Melissa L. McGuire, Rochelle Zorzi, Ivy Oandasan

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueQuality Management in Health Care · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompassInterprofessional educationPreparednessHealth careKnowledge managementQuality (philosophy)Process (computing)Quality managementMedical educationComputer scienceBusinessMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interprofessional education (IPE) is an important contributor to ensuring interprofessional collaboration and, ultimately, improving the quality of health care. However, there is a gap in available resources on critical success factors for implementing intentional interprofessional learning experiences. The Interprofessional Collaborative Organizational Map and Preparedness Assessment (IP-COMPASS) is a quality improvement framework that provides a structured process to help health care organizations become better prepared to offer IPE. Essentially, it is designed to increase understanding of the attributes of organizational culture that can create an environment that is conducive to interprofessional learning. The IP-COMPASS was developed on the basis of a systematic multimethod approach to accessing existing knowledge and then tested for utility, feasibility, and validity. This article tells the story of the development and testing of the IP-COMPASS.

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)0.003
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 score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.920

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.466 · 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