MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084270196 · doi:10.1080/00981389.2010.506410

An Application of the Hospital-in-the-Home Unlearning Context

2010· article· en· W2084270196 on OpenAlexaff
Juan‐Gabriel Cegarra‐Navarro, Anthony Wensley, Maria-Teresa Sánchez-Polo

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Work in Health Care · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)PsychologyNursingMedicineHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many researchers who have investigated health care organizations have indicated that health care professionals are replete with outdated knowledge, and some researchers go even further to argue that without the presence of a context that facilitates unlearning (forgetting) practitioners may lose the ability to recognize relevant changes with respect to knowledge pertaining to all aspects of the health care sector and they may decide to rely on potentially out-of-date knowledge and inappropriate ways of interpreting data with attendant loss of decision quality and attendant risks. This article presents an analysis and develops a model of the factors that influence unlearning which is focused on the health care industry and is comprised of three constituent components: (1) a framework characterizing the lens through which individuals view situations; (2) a framework for characterizing how individual habits change; and (3) a framework for characterizing the manner in which emergent understandings are consolidated into existing knowledge and knowledge structures. The model was developed and analyzed using qualitative data from the Hospital-in-the-Home Unit of a Spanish Regional Hospital. From a practical perspective the article provides for the identification of factors that influence the nature and effectiveness of the unlearning context in Hospital-in-the-Home-Units in regional hospitals. This not only valuably adds to the knowledge of the way these units function but also may enable actions to be taken to improve the learning processes associated with such units, resulting in an improvement in the quality of knowledge used in day-to-day decision making. It is to be assumed that, as a result of improving the quality of knowledge used in decision making, the quality of decisions will be improved.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 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

Citations23
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Work in Health CareSame topicNursing education and managementFrench-language works237,207