MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790399506 · doi:10.1177/0840470417744569

British Columbia Ministry of Health Patients as Partners: A transformational approach

2018· article· en· W2790399506 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sherry Bar, Kristen Grant, Sirisha Asuri, Shannon Holms

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChristian ministryHealth careTransformational leadershipPublic relationsNursingQuality (philosophy)BusinessMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patients as Partners is a quality improvement initiative of the British Columbia Ministry of Health (the Ministry) that aims to bring patient voice, choice, and representation to the forefront of healthcare through collaboration with patients, families, non-governmental organizations, funded partners, regional health authorities, and healthcare providers. A spectrum of patient engagement activities, including capacity building and self-management support, occur through partnerships at the individual patient and provider, community, and system levels. These activities ensure patient priorities are identified and embed a patient-centred care approach into provincial policies and projects. Multi-/interdisciplinary collaborations in the healthcare sector occur through participation in working groups, advisory committees, and engagement events. Ongoing improvements include enhancing measurement strategies and leveraging opportunities around gaps. The Ministry was honoured with the International Association of Public Participation Award as the 2016 Canadian Organization of the Year in recognition of improving healthcare through patient and public 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.467
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.298 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management ForumSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207