MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132782558 · doi:10.1145/1240624.1240661

An observational study on information flow during nurses' shift change

2007· article· en· W2132782558 on OpenAlexaff
Charlotte Tang, Sheelagh Carpendale

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicPersonal Information Management and User Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational studyDemographicsComputer scienceInformation flowInformation sharingVariety (cybernetics)MultitudeData scienceHuman–computer interactionWorld Wide WebMedicineArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an observational study that was conducted to guide the design and development of technologies to support information flow during nurses' shift change in a hospital ward. Our goal is to find out how the complex information sharing processes during nurses' brief shift change unfold in a hospital setting. Our study shows the multitude of information media that nurses access during the parallel processes of information assembly and disassembly: digital, paper-based, displayed and verbal media. An initial analysis reveals how the common information spaces, where information media are positioned and accessible by all participants, are actively used and how they interact with the personal information spaces ephemerally constructed by the participants. Several types of information are consistently transposed from the common information spaces to the personal information space including: demographics, historical data, reminders and to-dos, alerts, prompts, scheduling and reporting information. Information types are often enhanced with a variety of visual cues to help nurses carry out their tasks.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.591
GPT teacher head0.502
Teacher spread0.089 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations94
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPersonal Information Management and User BehaviorFrench-language works237,207