MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052931789 · doi:10.1108/14777270610660538

New frontiers and approaches to clinical governance

2006· article· en· W2052931789 on OpenAlex
Sam Sheps

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Governance An International Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Safety and Medication Errors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityCorporate governanceClinical governanceQuality (philosophy)Element (criminal law)Value (mathematics)Face (sociological concept)Engineering ethicsConceptual frameworkHealth careManagement scienceProcess managementPolitical scienceSociologyBusinessEngineeringManagementComputer scienceSocial scienceEpistemologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Seeks to explore conceptual approaches and training paradigms that are necessary to counter new challenges in the face of new concepts and tools to assess and mitigate threats to patient safety, while enhancing quality of care. Design/methodology/approach Interdisciplinary conceptual approaches and a specific strategy – that of Canada's Western Regional Training Centre for Health Services Research – are presented. Findings A critical element in meeting the new challenges in clinical governance is significant change in both managerial and clinical culture. Originality/value The approach outlined directly addresses many of the tensions inherent in current clinical governance and broadens the conception of clinical governance to embrace a wider array of critical health system issues.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.225
Threshold uncertainty score0.729

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.324
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.180 · 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