MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388565388 · doi:10.1177/08404704231211165

Partnership in care: Organic systems framework strategies for patients and care providers

2023· article· en· W4388565388 on OpenAlexaff
Phil Cady

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsRoyal Roads University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipContext (archaeology)Perspective (graphical)Health careKnowledge managementConceptual frameworkPublic relationsHealthcare systemBusinessSociologyNursingMedicinePolitical scienceComputer scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The organic systems framework is a conceptual social sciences theoretical framework developed by renowned author Barry Oshry. Oshry outlines how we are often blind to the context we are in and our reactions to those conditions, which leads to certain experiences. This article emanates from the author's reflections on bringing organic systems insights to groups and organizations worldwide and how such strategies in relational systems may apply to patients and care providers working together in partnership. As patients and care providers engage in such partnerships, they enter distinctly different contexts, each with unique challenges and opportunities. Written from a first-person perspective, the author moves beyond seeing the patient as a client in the healthcare system and into the possibilities of how patients and providers can work together across contexts to create and sustain meaningful care-based partnerships.

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)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0190.051
Scholarly communication0.0230.017
Open science0.0040.033
Research integrity0.0080.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management Forum→Same topicMental Health and Patient Involvement→French-language works237,207→