MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053511011 · doi:10.1097/qmh.0b013e31823170a5

Evidence-Based Refinement of Health and Social Services

2011· article· en· W2053511011 on OpenAlex
Carol L. McWilliam, Abe Oudshoorn

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

VenueQuality Management in Health Care · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationIntervention (counseling)Health careQuality (philosophy)Health services researchManagement sciencePublic relationsPsychologyNursingPublic healthComputer scienceMedicinePolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To promote evidence-based refinement of quality health and social services delivery and care, decision makers, researchers, and practitioners often undertake intervention research. Intervention research tests and describes new strategies for achieving desired outcomes. But theoretical, methodological, and practical issues continue to plague even alternative participatory approaches to intervention research, raising questions about its potential for promoting quality health and social services and care. In response to this persistent challenge, the authors of this article propose a radical solution, namely intravention research, laying out its unique features as well as its theoretical and practical implications. Their conceptualization sets the stage for dialogue on options for advancing research methodologies and methods that might better promote evidence-informed health and social services.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.295
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.194 · 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