MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604133518 · doi:10.3233/978-1-61499-742-9-167

Expert Medical Decision-Making: How the Data-Frame Theory Can Explain Physician Sense-Making

2017· article· en· W2604133518 on OpenAlexaff
Darren Hudson, Gurmeet Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in health technology and informatics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrame (networking)Medical decision makingComputer scienceClinical decision makingTask (project management)Decision theoryNaturalismMaking-ofMedical informationManagement sciencePsychologyArtificial intelligenceKnowledge managementMedicineEpistemologyMathematicsFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The major task of physicians is decision making. This is often done in time pressured situations. The traditional theory of decision making does not reflect this reality and naturalistic decision making is a more appropriate model. The first step is to make sense of the patient or the problem and the Data-Frame Theory of Klein seems to be the best model. This model has significant implications in the way we view clinical information systems, communication and medical education.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.021
Scholarly communication0.0090.016
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in health technology and informaticsSame topicClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic SkillsFrench-language works237,207