MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2350272129 · doi:10.69554/ylgs9041

Considerations and benefits of implementing an online database tool for business continuity

2016· article· en· W2350272129 on OpenAlexaff
Susanne Mackinnon, Jennifer Pinette

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsProvincial Health Services Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess managementBusiness continuityBusiness process managementProcess (computing)BusinessKey (lock)Business processSituation awarenessKnowledge managementComputer scienceOperations managementEngineeringComputer securityMarketingWork in process

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In today's challenging climate of ongoing fiscal restraints, limited resources and complex organisational structures there is an acute need to investigate opportunities to facilitate enhanced delivery of business continuity programmes while maintaining or increasing acceptable levels of service delivery. In 2013, Health Emergency Management British Columbia (HEMBC), responsible for emergency management and business continuity activities across British Columbia's health sector, transitioned its business continuity programme from a manual to automated process with the development of a customised online database, known as the Health Emergency Management Assessment Tool (HEMAT). Key benefits to date include a more efficient business continuity input process, immediate situational awareness for use in emergency response and/or advanced planning and streamlined analyses for generation of reports.

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)0.077
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.207
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 score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0770.207
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0180.026
Open science0.0090.007
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.006

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207