MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794317585 · doi:10.12927/hcq.2018.25429

Open Family Presence Adoption: Role of Patient and Family Advisors

2018· article· en· W2794317585 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Malori Keller, Jennifer Wright, Serese Selanders, Darlene Dyck

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Quarterly · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBest practiceNursingBusinessPsychologyFamily medicinePublic relationsMedicinePolitical scienceManagementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The philosophy of patient- and family-centred care is widely being adopted in Canada. Critical to this philosophy is the engagement of patients and families as full partners in healthcare. Saskatchewan has successfully adopted a provincial policy that eliminates restrictive visiting hours in hospitals and other healthcare facilities that support partnership with patients and families. This article explains the key role that patient and family advisors played in identifying the need for change and co-creating the implemented Open Family Presence Policy in Saskatchewan. The article outlines the system model, method and audit process that supported the policy implementation.

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)0.066
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.112
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0660.112
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.328
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare QuarterlySame topicReproductive Health and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207