MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098302256 · doi:10.1136/emj.2011.112250

A framework for measuring quality in the emergency department

2011· article· en· W2098302256 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Cameron, Michael J. Schull, Matthew W Cooke

Bibliographic record

VenueEmergency Medicine Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Safety and Medication Errors
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePatient safetyQuality (philosophy)Medical emergencyEmergency departmentOutcome (game theory)Quality managementVariable (mathematics)MEDLINEHealth careOperations managementNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is increasing concern that medical care is of variable quality, with variable outcomes, safety, costs and experience for patients. Despite substantial efforts to improve patient safety, some studies suggest little evidence of reductions in adverse events. Furthermore, there is limited agreement about what outcomes are expected and whether increased expenditure results in a real improvement in outcome or experience. In emergency medicine, many countries have developed specific indicators to help drive improvements in patient care. Most of these are time based and there is a lack of consensus regarding which indicators are high priority and what an appropriate framework for measuring quality should look like.

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)0.066
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0660.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0180.014
Science and technology studies0.0050.016
Scholarly communication0.0120.012
Open science0.0060.010
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.485
GPT teacher head0.533
Teacher spread0.048 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations46
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmergency Medicine JournalSame topicPatient Safety and Medication ErrorsFrench-language works237,207