MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064767917 · doi:10.1016/j.hcmf.2012.12.002

Evaluating the Success of a Hospital's Community Engagement Process

2013· article· en· W2064767917 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yolande E. Chan, Leslie A. Benecki

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences CentreQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Process (computing)BusinessProcess managementService (business)Value (mathematics)Public relationsCommunity engagementCommunity hospitalNursingKnowledge managementMedicineMarketingComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This case study outlines how an Ontario hospital initiated an intensive Citizens' Advisory Panel related to budget and service provision decisions. The article describes the community and management context, community engagement process, resulting recommendations, and board response. It article further identifies the process and findings of a concurrent independent evaluation and highlights important takeaways, such as the required time commitment, the need for skilled facilitators, and the value of transparent board decisions.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.610
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.282
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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