MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2245495895 · doi:10.12927/hcq.2015.24432

A Chronic Disease Prevention and Management Corridor© Approach to Supporting System-Level Transformations for Chronic Conditions

2015· article· en· W2245495895 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tara Sampalli, Erin Christian, Lynn Edwards, Ashley Ryer

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Quarterly · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsCapital District Health AuthorityNova Scotia Health Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova scotiaChronic diseaseDisease managementConceptual frameworkProcess managementMedicineBest practiceBusinessEnvironmental planningHealth management systemEnvironmental resource managementPolitical scienceGeographyIntensive care medicineAlternative medicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Improving care for chronic conditions requires system-level transformations to ensure multiple levels of adoption and sustainability of the implemented improvements. These comprehensive solutions require transformations and supports at various levels, leadership and process changes at service/program level. Recognizing the importance of an organization-wide strategy to mitigate the growing issue of chronic disease prevention and management, a novel system-level approach has been developed in a district health authority in Nova Scotia, Canada. In this paper, the contextual factors and efforts that led to the conceptual framework of the Chronic Disease Prevention and Management (CDPM) "Corridor©" to management of chronic conditions are discussed. The CDPM Corridor© essentially constitutes a system-level redesign process; common elements, tools and resources; and a hub of supports for chronic disease prevention and management. The CDPM Corridor

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.008
Scholarly communication0.0130.006
Open science0.0030.012
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.431
GPT teacher head0.593
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare QuarterlySame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207