Calidad y eficiencia de los cuidados de enfermería tras la implantación de la guía de buena práctica clínica “Cuidado y manejo de la ostomía”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolEl Hospital Universitario Vall d’Hebron fue acreditado en el ano 2015 como centro comprometido con la excelencia de los cuidados, tras implantar la guia de practica clinica (GPC) “Cuidado y manejo de la ostomia”. Esta GPC formaba parte del programa Best Practice Spotlight Organization (BPSO), promovido por la Registered Nurses Association of Ontario (RNAO) y coordinado por la unidad de Investigacion en Cuidados de Salud (Investen ISCIII, Instituto Carlos III, y el Centro Colaborador Espanol del Instituto Joanna Briggs). Durante la implantacion se protocolizaron los cuidados del estoma, unificandose las curas de enfermeria y estableciendo asi los circuitos necesarios a fin de asegurar la continuidad de la educacion sanitaria y cuidado y manejo de la ostomia. Actualmente se siguen las recomendaciones de la GPC y se ha consolidado la metodologia de trabajo en la unidad de Urologia EnglishThe Vall d'Hebron University Hospital (VHUH) was accredited in 2015 for its commitment to patient-centred care with the implementation of the clinical practice guideline “Ostomy care and Management”. The Registered Nurses Association of Ontario (RNAO) launched the Nursing Best Practice Guideline (NBPG) whose purpose it to support nurses by providing them with this GPC. Therefore, it is coordinated by the Healthcare Research Unit, Ivesten-ISCIII, Institute of Health Carlos III and the Spanish Collaborating Centre of Joanna Briggs). Implementation of a Stoma care plan, which was protocolized, help increase continuity in care provided by the nursing staff and contributed to unify collaboration with other member of the healthcare team. Thus, we have emphasized how important follow-up is for stoma patient. Currently we accept the recommendation of the GPC. Thus, a consolidated methodology has been developed in the Urology Department.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".