MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Hospital restructuring in smaller urban Ontario settings: unwritten rules and uncertain relations

2001· article· en· W2040195534 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Neil Hanlon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealthcare innovation and challenges
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRestructuringMetropolitan areaContext (archaeology)WelfareBusinessSocial WelfareService delivery frameworkPublic administrationScale (ratio)Order (exchange)Social securityHealth careService (business)Public relationsPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomicsMedicineFinanceMarketingLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Important changes are underway in the management and provision of welfare service activities in advanced capitalist societies as governments scale back their responsibilities and commitments to social security and health care. In order to understand the processes by which the reform imperatives of the central state are implemented at the local level, it is necessary to account for particular organizational and place‐based contingencies which influence decision making and strategic response. This paper presents a framework for understanding the context of executive decision making in the human services sector and uses the framework to illustrate issues of locally designed hospital restructuring in smaller urban centres in the province of Ontario, Canada. Specific experiences of the Chief Executive Officers of two non‐metropolitan hospital settings are examined to explore the unwritten rules of hospital conduct and the relations of uncertainty that characterize efforts to restructure hospital services through formal arrangements with other independently governed hospitals and health care delivery organizations.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0180.018
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations19
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennesSame topicHealthcare innovation and challengesFrench-language works237,207