MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3032132767 · doi:10.1097/ncm.0000000000000439

The Evolving Role of the Professional Case Manager

2020· article· en· W3032132767 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProfessional Case Management · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicE-Learning and COVID-19
Canadian institutions123 Certification (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificationBlueprintSample (material)Relevance (law)Descriptive statisticsMedical educationKnowledge managementTest (biology)PsychologyMedicineComputer scienceManagementPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The purpose of the national role and function study was to identify the essential activities and necessary knowledge areas for effective professional case management practice from the perspective of those directly involved. The study also aimed to inform the relevance and currency of the blueprint for the case management certification examination. PRIMARY PRACTICE SETTINGS: The national study covered the diverse case management practices and/or work settings across the full continuum of health and human services and numerous professional disciplines. METHODOLOGY AND SAMPLE: This cross-sectional descriptive study used the practice analysis method and online survey research design. It employed a purposive sample of 2,810 certified and not yet certified case managers who responded to an open participation link made available as an online survey. The final study sample supported the conduct of meaningful statistical analyses including multiple subgroup comparisons. RESULTS: The study identified the common activities (6 domains) and knowledge areas (5 domains) necessary for effective performance by professional case managers. Part I of this 2-part article series described the background of the participants and their perspectives of the practice and the knowledge applied by those responsible for the case manager's role. Part II, as shared in this article, reports on the factor/principal component analysis and how such activity informed the needed update of the test specifications for the Certified Case Manager (CCM) certification examination. The update reflects the continued evolution of the professional case management practice and ensures that the examination remains current and relevant. Of special note is the maturation of the case management practice; for example, greater emphasis on quality, safety, and outcomes; baccalaureate or higher education; and recognition of the value of certification. In addition, the 2019 role and function study has revealed that utilization review/management is evolving potentially as a function that is separate from that of the case manager. IMPLICATIONS FOR CASE MANAGEMENT PRACTICE: The study has identified the essential activities and knowledge areas of case management practice at both the micro and macro levels. These findings represent the substantive evidence of practice, keeping the CCM credentialing examination evidence-based and maintaining its validity for evaluating the competency of professional case managers. They have also documented the evolution of the practice over the past 5 years. Moreover, the findings may inform the development of programs and curricula for the training and advancement of case managers. The study instrument also is beneficial for use in further research into professional case management 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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.306 · 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