MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156819255

The e-Network Solution for Mental Health and Addictions Information Management

2010· article· en· W2156819255 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronicHealthcare · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Services Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthGovernment (linguistics)AddictionReferralChristian ministryHealth careManaged careMedicineBusinessNursingPsychiatryPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract ConnexOntario Health Services Information’s genesis was over 18 years ago. Back then, it was known as the Drug and Alcohol Registry of Treatment (DART). At that time, it was – and remains today – an innovative initiative that acted as an e-network solution for mental health and addiction information management. Using state-of-the-art technology and professional information management standards, DART was designed to offer a form of electronic healthcare by way of resource matching and referral for those who were seeking treatment for substance abuse problems. DART was also designed as a means to help improve the alcohol and drug treatment system in Ontario by providing easily accessible, up-to-date and accurate data about the availability of those services. This paper explores the development and growth of DART through its metamorphosis into ConnexOntario. Acting as a hub to the electronic network, the computerized database housing the Registry information provides the platform upon which information is shared amongst service providers, professionals, planners, government officials and members of the general public. Background In May of 1991, the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC) (formerly the Ministry of Health) requested that the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) (formerly the Addiction Research Foundation) develop a Registry of treatment services for drug and/or alcohol problems in Ontario. This was to be a three-year demonstration project. (For a more detailed description of the DART program, see Rush, Vincent and Chevendra [1993]). The rationale for this initiative, as provided by Rush and Chevendra (1994), included a number of identified needs for easily obtainable, reliable information about the availability and type of alcohol and drug treatment throughout Ontario. In 1990, Ontario residents were using out-of-country treatment services at an escalating rate, costing the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) close to $50 million annually (Rush et al. 1993). Questions arose as to whether Ontario’s treatment system was being underutilized and/or whether the extensive use of the American treatment system indicated a shortage of specific types of treatment in Ontario. Rush and Chevendra (1994) referenced reviews by Martin (1990) and Mammolitti (1991) regarding an issue where members of the public and Case Study

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.670
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0070.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.381 · 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