MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2343372783 · doi:10.35680/2372-0247.1108

The story of Emily

2016· article· en· W2343372783 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
L Jennings, Barb O'Neil, Kim Bossy, Denise Dodman, Jill Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenuePatient Experience Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBest practicePatient experienceHealth careAccreditationNursingMedicineManagementPublic relationsMedical educationPsychologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This case study describes Bluewater Health’s quest to weave the philosophy and practice of patient and family-centered care from the boardroom to the bedside by introducing Emily. Emily’s image is a composite of photographs of staff, physicians, volunteers, patients and families exemplifying that each has a role in Emily’s care. Emily represents every patient and family of the past, present, and future. Emily’s journey started with the launch of Bluewater Health‘s 2013-2015 strategic plan and moved throughout the organization as patient councils were established and the organization embedded three foundational patient and family-centered RNAO Best Practice Guidelines into daily practice with the support of over 100 best practice champions. The successful implementation of RNAO’s best practice guidelines earned Bluewater Health designation as a Best Practice Spotlight Organization. The organization took a risk in introducing the notion of Emily knowing that Emily could become a cliché. No one was prepared for what has come to be known as “the Emily effect.” Emily’s effect is now being realized in increased patient satisfaction and improved employee engagement scores helping to deliver on our Mission, We create exemplary healthcare experiences for patients and families every time. Bluewater Health is a fully accredited, 326-bed community hospital that cares for the residents of Sarnia-Lambton, Ontario.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0040.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePatient Experience JournalSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207