MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039320530 · doi:10.5737/1181912x2013035

Processus d’implantation d’infirmières pivots en oncologie au sein d’équipes locales conjointes (Centre hospitalier-Communauté)

2010· article· fr· W2039320530 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Lise Fillion, Michèle Aubin, Marie de Serres, Danielle Robitaille, Anne‐Marie Veillette, François Rainville

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Oncology Nursing Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsCanadian Association of Nurses in OncologyHôtel-Dieu de QuébecUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesGynecologyMedicineArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Implementing oncology nurse navigators or IPOs (which stands for "infirmière pivot en oncologie") is a key element of the Québec Cancer Control Program in order to improve the continuity of care. This qualitative study describes the process of implementing IPOs in teams working both in hospitals and in the community. Several groups of stakeholders (IPOs, physicians, nurses, various health workers, administrators, people with cancer and their families) described how they perceive the functions and effects related to this implementation. After putting results into perspective, we recommend developing measures promoting the dissemination of the role and integration of IPOs in formally defined health teams. We strongly advocate for the continuation of joint efforts in order to define and clarify this complex role.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.381 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Oncology Nursing JournalSame topicHealthcare Systems and PracticesFrench-language works237,207