MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206217259 · doi:10.26443/ijwpc.v9i1.317

Introduction of GRACE program required for COVID-19 disaster - especially for exhausted healthcare workers

2022· article· en· W4206217259 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Yusuke Takamiya, Makiko Arima

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Whole Person Care · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompassionHealth careMindfulnessCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychologyBuddhismBurnoutPalliative careMedical educationNursingPolitical scienceMedicineHistoryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The global pandemic of COVID-19 has exhausted many citizens around the world, especially health care workers. In times like these, mindfulness and compassion are necessary to heal many people. GRACE is a program that healthcare professionals can easily use in clinical practice. This program was developed by Roshi Joan Halifax, Ph.D., a Buddhist teacher, Zen priest, anthropologist, Cynda Rushton, the Bunting Chair of Ethics at Johns Hopkins University, and Professor Tony Back, a palliative care physician and medical oncologist at the University of Washington to prevent burnout among medical professionals. G.R.A.C.E. was developed in response to the deficit of compassion in the world today. The G.R.A.C.E. process includes the following five steps. G: Gathering attention and Grounding, R: Recalling intention, A: Attuning to self and other, C: Considering what will serve, E: Engaging and ending. G.R.A.C.E. is a tool for anyone, especially those in leadership roles or helping professions, such as medical workers, teachers, human rights workers, and more. In Japan, we invited three of the developers to hold training sessions since 2015. We held an annual conference every year, and monthly study sessions, in Tokyo and Osaka. Currently, we are planning to translate the online course developed in the US into Japanese and use it for training. In this presentation, we will report on the spread of G.R.A.C.E. in Japan, along with an overview of G.R.A.C.E.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0820.027

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.361 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Whole Person CareSame topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207