MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308714383 · doi:10.12927/hcq.2022.26944

Evaluating Toronto Hospitals’ COVID-19 Visitor Policy Using Accountability for Reasonableness

2022· article· en· W4308714383 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Vivian Tam, Rebecca Greenberg, Peter Allatt

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Quarterly · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Satisfaction in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisitor patternAccountabilityCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Best practiceQuality managementPublic relationsPublic administrationNursingPolitical scienceBusinessMedicineMarketingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In March 2020, the Toronto Region COVID-19 Hospital Operations Table developed a policy to guide visitor restrictions at six hospitals (Toronto Region COVID-19 Hospital Operations Table 2021). We conducted nine interviews with the developers and implementers of the policy based on the accountability for reasonableness (A4R) framework. Participants agreed that the A4R principles were met suggesting fair development and implementation of the policy. However, recurrent themes suggested that the policy disadvantaged those unable to advocate for themselves and that there were unaccounted costs to patients, such as lost time and function. We suggest that visitor policies incorporate equity considerations upfront and predetermine metrics to measure harms to patients.

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)0.183
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.235
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1830.235
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0110.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.550
Teacher spread0.356 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare QuarterlySame topicPatient Satisfaction in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207