MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092107775 · doi:10.7202/1071692ar

De l’analyse du travail sensoriel lors de prises de décision clinique au co-design d’un scénario de simulation

2020· article· fr· W3092107775 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhronesis · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La dimension sensorielle de la prise de décision clinique pose tout un défi pour la formation des professionnels de la santé. Par conséquent, comment stimuler chez eux une forme d’acuité sensorielle ? Nous avons mené une recherche en partenariat avec le laboratoire de simulation d’un hôpital canadien afin de comprendre le travail sensoriel effectué par des infirmières lors d’une prise de décision clinique. Pour ce faire, nous avons analysé les interactions se déroulant lors des groupes de discussion afin de révéler le travail sensoriel accompli par les infirmières lors de l’évaluation clinique de patients fictifs (personas).

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.510
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.544
GPT teacher head0.602
Teacher spread0.057 · 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