MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058701153 · doi:10.12927/cjnl.2004.16358

Innovations in Seniors' Care: Home Care/Physician Partnership

2004· article· en· W2058701153 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Barbara Korabek, Carol Ann Slauenwhite, Pat Rosenau, Project Manager, Laureen Ross

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing leadership · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipNursingRestructuringSustainabilityHealth careProcess (computing)Program evaluationPublic relationsProcess managementMedicineMedical educationBusinessPolitical sciencePublic administration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Innovations in Seniors' Care (Primary Care Partnerships) Project was implemented in 2000 in the Calgary Health Region, Alberta, to look at integration of services for seniors. The goal was to develop a sustainable collaborative partnership between family physicians and Community Care Coordinators--RNs (Home Care). The design and model were established in Stage I of the project. Stage II addressed implementation, challenges, barriers, evaluation, learnings and successes to date. Stage III looked at refinement, revision, final evaluation of the processes and dissemination of learnings. This paper describes startup procedures and implementation (selection of participants, educational sessions, evolution of partnerships and development of the evaluation framework). As the focus of the project was quality improvement, the section on implementation will discuss how and why changes occurred in the course of the process. Key challenges related to the restructuring of Home Care, creating tools and fostering unique individualized partnerships are also discussed. The conclusion evaluates the project's benefits in relation to (1) participant satisfaction, (2) sustainability and (3) impact on the system. The initial partnerships were formed in May 2001. New partnerships continue to be developed and constitute a key strategy in the Calgary Health Region's Primary Care Initiative.

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)0.000
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.755

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.285 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing leadershipSame topicInterprofessional Education and CollaborationFrench-language works237,207