MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2409810525

NHS reorganisation. Cause and effect.

2001· article· en· W2409810525 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kieran Walshe, Judith Smith

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Balance (ability)Working hoursPsychologyBusinessPolitical scienceOperations managementDemographic economicsEconomicsLabour economicsHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a survey of 304 chief executives, three-quarters felt the Shifting the Balance reorganisation would delay the delivery of the NHS plan over the next year. A quarter felt the delay would be severe. 55 per cent expressed negative views about the reorganisation. On average, chief executives were spending a quarter of their time implementing the reforms. Almost half were concerned about PCTs' ability to cope with an enlarged set of responsibilities. More than half (59 per cent) of chief executives thought their job would change as the result of the reorganisation. A quarter thought they were less likely to be working in the NHS.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.492
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicHealthcare Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207