MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The moving of St Vincent's: a tale in two cities

2001· article· en· W2410646838 on OpenAlexaff
Marion Haas, Jane P Hell, Liz A Chinchen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Medical Journal of Australia · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Aging, and Tourism Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health Outcomes
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScrutinyOpposition (politics)Health careGovernment (linguistics)PopulationInner cityPolitical scienceEconomic growthPublic administrationPublic relationsSociologySocioeconomicsPoliticsDemographyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Australia, demographic changes have seen the population of large cities move away from the inner city. This, combined with changes in healthcare delivery and the ageing of many tertiary teaching hospitals, has led governments to attempt to close, relocate or redefine the role of some institutions. Tracing the media coverage of two such events--the attempts to move St Vincent's hospitals in Sydney and Melbourne--provides some interesting insights into the challenges of resource allocation facing policymakers within the healthcare sector. Both hospitals were long-established, much-loved fixtures on inner-city sites with powerful connections to government and business. In Sydney, where the attempt was part of a larger plan to reallocate resources to the western suburbs, the announcement was met with 10 days of intense media coverage and scrutiny by lobby groups and the general public. By contrast, in Melbourne, no such announcement was made and the low-key reporting of support and opposition to the move occurred over two months. Both attempts failed. No matter how the debate is handled, radical changes involving long-established hospitals, powerful provider groups and loyal communities are very difficult to accomplish.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations4
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Medical Journal of AustraliaSame topicMigration, Aging, and Tourism StudiesFrench-language works237,207