MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038044384 · doi:10.1177/1553350609345487

Clinical Librarian Attendance at General Surgery Quality of Care Rounds (Morbidity and Mortality Conference)

2009· article· en· W2038044384 on OpenAlex
Elisa Greco, Marina Englesakis, Amy Faulkner, Boguslawa Trojan, Lorne Rotstein, David R. Urbach

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

VenueSurgical Innovation · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkToronto General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAttendanceGeneral surgeryQuality (philosophy)Family medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quality of Care rounds, also known as Mortality and Morbidity conferences, are an important and time-honored forum for quality audit in clinical surgery services. The authors created a modification to their hospital's Quality of Care rounds by incorporating a clinical librarian, who assisted residents in conducting literature reviews related to clinical topics discussed during the rounds. The objective of this article is to describe the authors' experience with this intervention. The clinical librarian program has greatly improved the Quality of Care rounds by aiding in literature searches and quality of up-to-date, evidence-based presentations.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.506

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.488
GPT teacher head0.588
Teacher spread0.100 · 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