MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172097010 · doi:10.12927/hcq.2009.21104

The Alberta Cardiac Access Collaborative: Improving the Cardiac Patient Journey

2009· article· en· W2172097010 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robyn Blackadar, Mishaela Houle

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Quarterly · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMedical emergencyBest practiceCollaborative CarePrimary careNursingFamily medicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Alberta Cardiac Access Collaborative (ACAC) is a joint initiative of Alberta's health system to improve access to adult cardiac services across the patient journey. ACAC has created new care delivery models and implemented best practices across Alberta in four streams across the continuum: heart attack, patient navigation, heart failure and arrhythmia. Emergency medical providers, nurses, primary care physicians, hospitals, cardiac specialists and clinicians are all working together to integrate services, bridge jurisdictions and geography with one aim--improving the patient journey for adults in need of cardiac care.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.850

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.368 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare QuarterlySame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207