MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2043299639 · doi:10.1016/s0840-4704(10)60402-4

La régionalisation à l'Î.-P.-É. Sept ans plus tard: <i>le travail d'équipe et des soins améliorés grâce à l'intégration de la santé et des services sociaux</i>

2001· article· fr· W2043299639 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kenneth Ezeard, Matthew D. Pavelich

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2001
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Un dirigeant des services de sante a l’Ile-du-Prince-Edouard, Kenneth Ezeard, CHE, estime qu'il est exact d'affirmer que la petite taille d'un organisme peut parfois etre avantageuse, surtout quand vient le temps de faire tomber les barrieres qui se dressent entre les differents segments des services sociaux et des services de sante. Il espere que le modele de l’I.-P.-E. pourra inspirer ses pairs ailleurs au pays, meme dans les plus grands centres urbains. M. Ezeard compte plus de 30 ans d'experience en administration de la sante. Avant de prendre les renes du West Prince Health Authority (I.-P.-E.) a titre de p.d.g., il a occupe les fonctions de directeur des services administratifs du PEI Health and Community Services Agency. Precedemment, il a ete directeur general du Queen Elizabeth Hospital de Charlottetown pendant 16 ans. Il est president du conseil d'administration du College canadien des directeurs de services de sante (CCDSS) et a deja cumule les memes fonctions aupres du Conseil canadien d'agrement des services de sante (CCASS) et de l'Association canadienne des soins de sante (ACS). Dans cette entrevue, M. Ezeard parle du role que jouent les organismes nationaux dans les soins de sante et des effets positifs de la regionalisation pour les citoyens de sa province.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.266

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.003

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management Forum→Same topicSocial Sciences and Governance→French-language works237,207→