MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146425425 · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0450

Developing Physician Communication Skills For Patient-Centered Care

2010· article· en· W2146425425 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Affairs · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnthusiasmIncentiveCertificationPaymentPatient satisfactionNursingLeverage (statistics)MedicineCommunication skillsMedical homeMedical educationPrimary careBusinessFamily medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Growing enthusiasm about patient-centered medical homes, fueled by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's emphasis on improved primary care, has intensified interest in how to deliver patient-centered care. Essential to the delivery of such care are patient-centered communication skills. These skills have a positive impact on patient satisfaction, treatment adherence, and self-management. They can be effectively taught at all levels of medical education and to practicing physicians. Yet most physicians receive limited training in communication skills. Policy makers and stakeholders can leverage training grants, payment incentives, certification requirements, and other mechanisms to develop and reward effective patient-centered communication.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.658
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.308 · 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