MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2598120001 · doi:10.12927/hcpap.2017.25004

Towards a Community-Based Dementia Care Strategy: A Perspective from Quebec

2016· letter· en· W2598120001 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Claire Godard‐Sebillotte, Isabelle Vedel, Howard Bergman

Bibliographic record

VenueA Nudge Too Far? A Nudge at All? On Paying People to Be Healthy · 2016
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityVanier College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaChristian ministryPerspective (graphical)Plan (archaeology)NursingMedicineBusinessGerontologyDiseasePsychologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Morton-Chang et al. highlighted in their article the key strategic pillars of a community-based dementia care strategy: put "people first," support informal caregiving and enable "ground up" innovation and change. In our commentary, we draw upon our experience as authors of the Quebec Alzheimer Plan and evaluators of its implementation by the Quebec Ministry of Health and Social Services (MSSS). To us, a sustainable dementia care strategy entails a patient-centred approach, grounded in primary care, caring for persons with dementia at every stage of the disease. Implementation of such a strategy requires an ongoing effort to allow innovation adoption by clinicians and organizations.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0310.014
Scholarly communication0.0130.007
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0260.029
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.239
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.187 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueA Nudge Too Far? A Nudge at All? On Paying People to Be Healthy→Same topicMental Health and Patient Involvement→French-language works237,207→