MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993370996

Modelo de Toma de Decisiones en Salud de Ottawa Aplicabilidad en la Práctica de Enfermería

2019· article· es· W2993370996 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
José L. Mendoza-García, Laura Rico-Herrera, Alicia Álvarez Aguirre

Bibliographic record

VenueSalud y administración/Salud y administración(México, impresa) · 2019
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldNursing
TopicNursing Diagnosis and Documentation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelevance (law)Health careWelfare economicsPsychologySociologyPolitical scienceEconomicsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Health decision-making implies that the person chooses from different alternatives which in their opinion, are either the most effective or represent the best benefits. To solve the conflict in decision-making, several models have been proposed. One of them is the Ottawa Decision Making Model, which shows how health decision-making should be shared between the person and the health care professional. The purpose of this article is to know the relevance of this health decision-making model and its applicability in nursing practice.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.327 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSalud y administración/Salud y administración(México, impresa)Same topicNursing Diagnosis and DocumentationFrench-language works237,207