MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060701087 · doi:10.1186/1478-4491-7-17

Conditions underpinning success in joint service-education workforce planning

2009· editorial· en· W2060701087 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mary Ellen Purkis, Barbara Herringer, Lynn Stevenson, Laureen Styles, Jocelyne Van Neste-Kenny

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Resources for Health · 2009
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsVancouver Island UniversityNorth Island CollegeCamosun CollegeIsland HealthUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnderpinningWorkforce planningWorkforceSocial policyJoint (building)Health services researchWorkforce developmentService (business)BusinessHealth administrationPublic relationsProcess managementNursingPublic healthMedicinePolitical scienceMarketingEconomic growthEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vancouver Island lies just off the southwest coast of Canada. Separated from the large urban area of Greater Vancouver (estimated population 2.17 million) by the Georgia Strait, this geographical location poses unique challenges in delivering health care to a mixed urban, rural and remote population of approximately 730,000 people living on the main island and the surrounding Gulf Islands. These challenges are offset by opportunities for the Vancouver Island Health Authority (VIHA) to collaborate with four publicly funded post-secondary institutions in planning and implementing responses to existing and emerging health care workforce needs. In this commentary, we outline strategies we have found successful in aligning health education and training with local health needs in ways that demonstrate socially accountable outcomes. Challenges encountered through this process (i.e. regulatory reform, post-secondary policy reform, impacts of an ageing population, impact of private, for-profit educational institutions) have placed demands on us to establish and build on open and collaborative working relationships. Some of our successes can be attributed to evidence-informed decision-making. Other successes result from less tangible but no less important factors. We argue that both rational and "accidental" factors are significant--and that strategic use of "accidental" features may prove most significant in our efforts to ensure the delivery of high-quality health care to our communities.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.443
GPT teacher head0.664
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Resources for HealthSame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207