Healthy Workplaces and Effective Teamwork: Viewed through the Lens of Primary Healthcare Renewal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This commentary reviews the content of the lead papers through the lens of primary healthcare renewal (PHCR). Although PHCR has been on the national agenda for decades, only since the turn of the century has real progress been made with emerging new practice models based on inter-professional team care. While much is expected, relatively little is known of the function and effectiveness of such teams in Canada. As well, information regarding healthy workplaces has focused on individual professional groups rather than an inter-professional workforce. Much of the knowledge currently available regarding team effectiveness and healthy workplaces comes from the hospital sector and may not be completely transferable. The work of the Interprofessional Education for Collaborative Patient-Centred Practice initiative and the results of the Health Transition Fund and Primary Health Care Transition Fund are additional key sources of research and knowledge transfer to guide the education, function and evaluation of inter-professional teamwork in these new primary healthcare practice models.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.050 | 0.047 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".