MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126775638 · doi:10.1177/1084822309360383

Keeping Community Health Care Workers Safe

2010· article· en· W2126775638 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

VenueHome Health Care Management & Practice · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careNursingFeelingPatient safetyProcess (computing)Occupational safety and healthCommunity healthBusinessSign (mathematics)MedicinePsychologyPublic healthComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Organizations have a responsibility to ensure the safety of staff who provide care in the community. In a survey conducted within a regional health authority in Newfoundland, health care providers reported feeling unsafe while conducting home visits. Safety initiatives were explored, and a safety program was implemented within this region to address safety concerns. The safety program includes three key components: a risk assessment screening tool, a sign-in/sign-out system, and a buddy system. This article describes the evaluation process and outcomes of these three components. The evaluation process and outcomes may be useful to other health care organizations interested in promoting workplace safety.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.794
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.444 · 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