MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Study of Psychological Satisfaction of Population with Services of the Primary Health Care Integrated into Public Health

2020· article· en· W3110019854 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nabi Yessimov, Nailya Izmailova, Dauletkhan Yessimov

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intellectual Disability - Diagnosis and Treatment · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Systems and Public Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthHealth promotionHealth careNursingHRHISInternational healthHealth policyPromotion (chess)MedicineBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article aims to examine public opinion to achieve a synergistic effect and thereby integrate primary patient feedback in the organization of the promotion of primary care and public health. The leading method to the study of this problem is the questionnaire survey that has afforded revealing issues of regulation of primary and public health care, and in particular, the state of the psychological attitude of patients to primary health care integrated into the public health system of the Republic of Kazakhstan. In order to study the organization of the Primary Health Care System integrated into Public Health Service, 400 healthcare workers were questioned. The authors also analyzed socio-psychological factors that affect the quality of the provision of qualified primary health care. The practical novelty of the study is that the organization of the synergic system of primary health care and public health is implemented based on the public administration system and local systems of public health evaluation. It was concluded that it is more expedient to build a system of integration of primary health care and public health based on feedback from the people and a formation of a spatially distributed network of public medical organizations, which will reduce the burden on, particularly busy areas.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intellectual Disability - Diagnosis and TreatmentSame topicHealthcare Systems and Public HealthFrench-language works237,207