MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057330673 · doi:10.1016/s0840-4704(10)60269-4

Shifting Clinical Accountability and the Pursuit of Quality: Aligning Clinical and Administrative Approaches

2008· review· en· W2057330673 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mark Dobrow, Terrence Sullivan, Carol Sawka

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCancer Care Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccountabilityClinical governanceQuality (philosophy)Corporate governancePublic administrationBusinessNarrativePolitical scienceMedicinePublic relationsHealth careLawFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a narrative review of the literature on clinical accountability, and draws particularly on England's experience establishing "clinical governance" as a base to examine the establishment of a clinical accountability framework for cancer services in Ontario. The review suggests that clinical governance and accountability approaches that actively mesh clinical and administrative approaches at both system and local levels are more likely to be effective in improving quality of care.

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 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)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.735
GPT teacher head0.641
Teacher spread0.095 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations19
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management ForumSame topicHealthcare Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207