MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056877910 · doi:10.3138/9r62-q0v1-l188-1406

Human Resources Planning and the Production of Health: A Needs-Based Analytical Framework

2007· article· en· W2056877910 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Stephen Birch, George Kephart, Gail Tomblin-Murphy, Linda O’Brien‐Pallas, Rob Alder, Adrian MacKenzie

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Policy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth human resourcesProductivityHuman resourcesProduction (economics)Health carePopulationBusinessStrategic human resource planningEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental healthStrategic planningEconomic growthEconomicsMarketingMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional approaches to health human resources planning emphasize the effects of demographic change on the needs for health human resources. Planning requirements are largely based on the size and demographic mix of the population applied to simple population-provider or population-utilization ratios. We develop an extended analytical framework based on the production of health-care services and the multiple determinants of health human resource requirements. The requirements for human resources are shown to depend on four separate elements: demography, epidemiology, standards of care, and provider productivity. The application of the framework is illustrated using hypothetical scenarios for the population of the combined provinces of Atlantic Canada.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations106
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public PolicySame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207