MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2461407286 · doi:10.1177/1084822315619742

Normalisation Process Theory and the Implementation of Resident Assessment Instrument–Home Care in Saskatchewan, Canada

2016· article· en· W2461407286 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHome Health Care Management & Practice · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComprehensionProcess (computing)NursingHome healthHealth careClinical PracticePsychologyMedicineComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Meeting the health needs of the community client in Saskatchewan, Canada, has been theoretically improved by the home care program’s adoption of an electronic client assessment system, Resident Assessment Instrument–Home Care (RAI-HC). Valid and reliable client outcome data are generated from a completed RAI-HC, and available to home care and its assessor coordinators to support clinical and program decisions. To realize the benefits of RAI-HC, user comprehension and application of this system in totality is central. This study fostered an understanding of the association of normalisation process theory (NPT) with the implementation, utilization, and integration of RAI-HC within home care practice in Saskatchewan. The findings suggest encumbered utilization and integration of RAI-HC into day-to-day home care practice, and a parallel relationship with NPT.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.441
Threshold uncertainty score0.577

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.384 · 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