MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048546895 · doi:10.1177/1471301212437455

The challenge of dementia care knowledge exchange: Key factors in a national approach

2012· article· en· W2048546895 on OpenAlexafffund
Belinda Parke, Tricia Woo, Kathleen Cruttenden, Sophie Sapergia, A.D.F. Dhondt

Bibliographic record

VenueDementia · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesMental Health Commission of CanadaMcMaster UniversityUniversity of New BrunswickUniversity of Alberta
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsDementiaNursingPsychologyHealth careService (business)MedicineGerontologyBusinessPolitical scienceDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report a dementia knowledge-to-practice exchange activity to describe the process undertaken to improve care and support for older adults living with dementia. We describe the team’s early development and decision-making process (including its early focus on family physicians), and eventual creation of a Dementia Pocket Card tool. The tool can support health professionals and families with dementia case-finding, assessment, diagnosis and appropriate service provision.

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)0.121
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.110
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.639

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1210.110
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0300.017
Scholarly communication0.0340.033
Open science0.0060.044
Research integrity0.0110.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.264
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDementiaSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207