MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902332833 · doi:10.1177/0840470418809105

Indigenous model of care to health and social care workforce planning

2018· article· en· W2902332833 on OpenAlexaff
Eileen Florence Pepler, Rebecca Martell

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousWorkforceHealth careSocial careBusinessNursingEconomic growthMedicineEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indigenous people have always had the end in mind-a long range vision for the health and wellbeing of their families and communities. Creating Indigenous solutions-oriented approaches to strategic health and social care workforce planning is an essential component to the realization of self-determination and empowerment, accessible health services, community participation, and flexible approaches to care. This article suggests using an Indigenous "models of care" population health approach to health and social care workforce planning that takes a critical thinking, systems thinking, and design thinking approach using digital tools (eg, scenario planning and population health simulation). It also proposes to increase the number of Indigenous professionals through Indigenous partnership initiatives with professional groups and academic institutions. This article is written to encourage discussion on the use of a whole system approach to developing Indigenous models of health delivery and to inform strategic services and workforce planning.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.017
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.375 · 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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management ForumSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207