MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024522432

Patient advisors for victims of traumatic amputation: a critical intervention

2015· article· en· W3024522432 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marie‐Pascale Pomey, Karine Vigneault, Josée Arsenault, Johanne Higgins, Valérie Lahaie, Olivier Fortin, Michèle de Guise, A. Danino

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Canadian institutionsHôtel-Dieu de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecMcGill University Health CentreUniversité de MontréalSante Montreal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Psychological interventionMedicineRehabilitationPsychologyNursingHumanitiesPhysical therapyArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patient advisors for victims of traumatic amputation: a critical intervention. Since 2014, the Centre of Expertise in Reimplantation and Microsurgical Revascularization at the University of Montreal (CEVARMU) has been recruiting on an ad hoc basis former patients, who have completed the rehabilitation process, to accompany and support new patients at the Centre during their care process. Considered full-fledged partners of the care team, these patient advisors are invited to meet with patients who are hospitalized or in the rehabilitation process to not only share their experience but also ensure that the treatment plans proposed to the patients are well understood and meet their needs. Around forty interventions have been conducted by five patient advisors, helping to strengthen the credibility of professional interventions, break down patients' isolation, and give new meaning to the work of health professionals.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular TechniquesFrench-language works237,207