MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3083764592 · doi:10.5430/jha.v9n4p34

Mediation in a healthcare setting: Strategies and implementation

2020· article· en· W3083764592 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alan L. Nager

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hospital Administration · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConflict Management and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMediationSet (abstract data type)Health careOrder (exchange)Knowledge managementProcess managementComputer sciencePsychologyPublic relationsBusinessSociologyPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conflicts and friction are part and parcel of healthcare environments. Associated complexity and multilayered intricacies that exist, leads to unsettling and unresolved circumstances. Issues and problems may occur at all levels in the hierarchical set up universally in healthcare institutions. Resolution of these conflictual experiences has to occur with a pervasive and streamlined methodology that fully dissects out the issues, in order to gain understanding as a preemptive strategy. Through a collaborative framework and mediation, success can be achieved.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.072
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.062
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0720.062
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.014
Scholarly communication0.0200.014
Open science0.0050.024
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hospital AdministrationSame topicConflict Management and NegotiationFrench-language works237,207