MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2974976319 · doi:10.1177/0840470419869035

Pathway to professionalizing health leadership in Canada: The two faces of Janus

2019· article· en· W2974976319 on OpenAlexaffabout
Graham Dickson, John Van Aerde, Bill Tholl

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsCanadian Thoracic SocietyCanadian Paediatric SocietyCanadian Cardiovascular Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfessionalizationCertificationLicensurePublic relationsPolitical scienceLeadership styleServant leadershipState (computer science)Transactional leadershipPsychologySociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article looks at the current state of health leadership in terms of expectations for professionalism: controlled entry, exit, and licensure/certification; a social contract to provide public services for the good of Canadians; and a unique body of knowledge and practice generally accepted. Looking to the future, and using the same three criteria, a compelling case for pursuing the professionalization of health leadership is made using LEADS as a roadmap. The article also outlines how to realize the professionalization of health leadership in Canada and why it is important to do so.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.583

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.366
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.109 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management ForumSame topicEvaluation and Performance AssessmentFrench-language works237,207