MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3129463315 · doi:10.1080/00981389.2021.1880532

Clinical supervision in frontline health care: A survey of social workers in Ontario, Canada

2021· article· en· W3129463315 on OpenAlexaffabout
Karen M. Sewell, Dennis Kao, Kenta Asakura

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Work in Health Care · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReceiptSocial workNursingHealth careClinical supervisionMedicineFamily medicinePsychologyBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Researchers have documented diminishing staff supervision in health care settings, while noting the complexity and dynamic nature of health care systems. A secondary data analysis of a survey of the Ontario Association of Social Workers (N=666) explored the contemporary receipt of different types of supervision in frontline health care. Most social worker participants were involved in supervision, receiving administrative and supportive supervision. Only 52% engaged in clinical supervision, even though most spent over 50% of work time with clients with complex needs. Factors related to the receipt of clinical supervision included setting, experience, gender, and availability of clinical practice leaders.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.362 · 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.

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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Work in Health CareSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207