MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114761890 · doi:10.1177/1553350611409063

Adoption of Surgical Innovations

2011· article· en· W2114761890 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSurgical Innovation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity Health NetworkHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSnowball samplingNonprobability samplingCredentialingChampionQualitative researchSentinel lymph nodeGrounded theoryPsychological interventionHealth careMedical educationNursingBreast cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has been unevenly adopted into practice in Canada. In this qualitative study, the authors explored individual, institutional, and policy factors that may have influenced SLNB adoption. This information will guide interventions to improve SLNB implementation. METHODS: Qualitative methodology was used to examine factors influencing SLNB adoption. Grounded theory guided data collection and analysis. Semistructured interviews were based on Roger's diffusion of innovation theory. Purposive and snowball sampling was used to identify participants. Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted with urban, rural, academic, and community health care providers and administrators to ensure all perspectives and motivations were explored. Two individuals independently analyzed data and achieved consensus on emerging themes and their relationship. RESULTS: A total of 43 interviews were completed with 21 surgeons, 5 pathologists, 7 nuclear medicine physicians, and 10 administrators. Generated themes included awareness of SLNB with the exception of some administrators, acknowledged advantage of SLNB, SLNB compatibility with beliefs regarding axillary staging, acknowledgment that SLNB was a complex innovation to adopt, extensive trialing of SLNB prior to adoption, observable benefits with SLNB, acknowledgment that hospital-level administrative support enabled adoption, desire for a provincial policy supporting SLNB to assist in hospital-level adoption, requirement of a local high-volume breast surgery champion who communicated extensively with team to facilitate local adoption, and need for credentialing of SLNB to ensure quality. CONCLUSIONS: SLNB is a complex innovation to adopt. Successful adoption was assisted by a high-volume breast cancer surgical champion, interprofessional communication, and administrative support.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.584
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.246 · 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