MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049343264 · doi:10.1108/14777270310503490

The Denver Connection (Porter‐Swedish) experiment revisited

2003· article· en· W2049343264 on OpenAlex
David Birnbaum, Carol Petersen

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

VenueClinical Governance An International Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsBirds Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemiseRestructuringAccreditationQuality (philosophy)Health careSet (abstract data type)Quality managementBusinessManagementOperations managementPublic relationsMarketingEconomicsPolitical scienceLawComputer scienceFinanceManagement system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The so‐called Denver connection should be today’s shining example of how to achieve health care quality and safety improvement through lasting evidence‐based collaborations led by health professionals. Instead, this 30 year old experiment is all but forgotten and the story of its demise is a tale of destructive corporate growth. Unfortunately, it bears prescient similarity to problems in health care restructuring today. We should question whether today’s business models, management performance, and accreditation mandates have set the right stage before we venture forth to act again. Unless we ensure a better environment in which to operate, today’s “new” approaches for improving quality and safety may be doomed to the same sad fate.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.710
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.233
GPT teacher head0.585
Teacher spread0.352 · 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