MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153320792 · doi:10.3109/13561820902921654

Performance-based competencies for culturally responsive interprofessional collaborative practice

2009· article· en· W2153320792 on OpenAlexaff
Valerie Banfield, Kelly Lackie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interprofessional Care · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsRegistered Nurses' Association of OntarioNova Scotia Health Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFacilitatorInterprofessional educationMedical educationCurriculumVariety (cybernetics)MedicineCertificationHealth careNursingKnowledge managementPsychologyPedagogyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper will highlight how a literature review and stakeholder-expert feedback guided the creation of an interprofessional facilitator-collaborator competency tool, which was then used to design an interprofessional facilitator development program for the Partners for Interprofessional Cancer Education (PICE) Project. Cancer Care Nova Scotia (CCNS), one of the PICE Project partners, uses an Interprofessional Core Curriculum (ICC) to provide continuing education workshops to community-based practitioners, who as a portion of their practice, care for patients experiencing cancer. In order to deliver this curriculum, health professionals from a variety of disciplines required education that would enable them to become culturally sensitive interprofessional educators in promoting collaborative patient-centred practice. The Registered Nurses Professional Development Centre (RN-PDC), another PICE Project partner, has expertise in performance-based certification program design and utilizes a competency-based methodology in its education framework. This framework and methodology was used to develop the necessary interprofessional facilitator competencies that incorporate the knowledge, skills, and attitudes required for performance. Three main competency areas evolved, each with its own set of competencies, performance criteria and behavioural indicators.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.415 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations38
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Interprofessional CareSame topicInterprofessional Education and CollaborationFrench-language works237,207