MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200076004 · doi:10.1136/leader-2021-000485

Leading by virtual interaction: an application of cultural-historical activity theory

2021· editorial· en· W3200076004 on OpenAlexaff
Ana Sjaus, Krista Ritchie

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Leader · 2021
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent UniversityIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConverseSituatedActivity theoryPublic relationsConstruct (python library)Knowledge managementSociologyPsychologyComputer sciencePolitical scienceCognitive scienceEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction The pandemic spread of SARS-CoV-2, a novel, highly contagious and easily transmissible pathogen, has profoundly affected all aspects of human interaction. Guided by the need to reduce face-to-face contacts, medical organisations have rapidly shifted group activities to virtual platforms. Over 1 year into the pandemic, the necessity to maintain public health restrictions ensures that virtual meetings will be the norm for the foreseeable future. It has yet to be understood how virtual technologies shape healthcare and academic cultures, affect interactions, or influence strategic decisions and policies within these systems. Conclusion In this article, the authors reflect on the move from historically situated activity systems of team leadership in healthcare to ones that now exist in virtual formats. Cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) is a framework that explains complex human actions, and how they unfold over time through interaction with mediational tools (eg, technology) and various people representing their own communities, roles and perceived divisions of labour. The authors use the lens of CHAT as a framework to understand the shifting dynamics at play and offer strategies for leaders to co-establish activity systems with team members to make goals of group activities explicit and to deliberately work toward them. Five specific strategies proposed are: (1) use software platforms that fit your needs and give voice to all attendees with technical support present in meetings; (2) converse explicitly about roles and emerging role fluidity during times of change and pandemic response; (3) co-construct something new intentionally; (4) engage in implementation science at this time; and (5) lead intentionally while honouring cultural norms and values. It is imperative that any changes, even the ones that are a part of the pandemic response, are made consistent with the core shared values of the medical community as this necessary new way of coming together is embraced with collective wisdom.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.010
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.379 · 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
GenreEditorial

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ LeaderSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207