MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2746549107 · doi:10.12927/hcq.2017.25227

Leading Practices in Alternate Levels of Care (ALC) Avoidance: A Standardized Approach

2017· article· en· W2746549107 on OpenAlexaffabout
Elaine Burr, Sandra Dickau

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Quarterly · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealthcare innovation and challenges
Canadian institutionsToronto East General HospitalHome and Community Care Support Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBest practiceHealth careSet (abstract data type)NursingBusinessMedicinePublic relationsPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Providers across the healthcare system want to provide the right care, in the right place, in a timely manner. Patients listed as alternate level of care (ALC) are often not in the right place to receive the necessary care. In 2014, using a standardized approach, the Toronto Central Community Care Access Centre (CCAC), now Toronto Central Local Health Integration Network (LHIN), set out to reduce the number of ALC beds in hospitals to ensure that more people received the most appropriate level and type of care. Case studies cited in this article will highlight the successes that CCAC and its various partners have realized in developing and implementing strategies.

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)0.153
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.094
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.810

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1530.094
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0110.007
Science and technology studies0.0230.035
Scholarly communication0.0300.021
Open science0.0120.044
Research integrity0.0100.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare QuarterlySame topicHealthcare innovation and challengesFrench-language works237,207