MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390622773 · doi:10.15290/oes.2023.03.113.06

Wykorzystanie potencjału naukowo-badawczego i leczniczego oraz kondycja finansowa Narodowego Instytutu Onkologii im. Marii Skłodowskiej-Curie w latach 2017–2021

2023· article· en· W4390622773 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOptimum Economic Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institutes of Health Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityPolitical sciencePublic healthMedicineLibrary scienceComputer scienceNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose – The study concerns the National Institute of Oncology, which is the largest medical research institute in Poland. It presents the development of the institution and evaluates the scientific, research and treatment activities as well as the financial situation of the above‑mentioned institutions. Research method – The article is a case study. The method of examining documents and data contained in the annual activity reports of the Director of the NIO and its financial statements for the years 2017–2021 has been used. In evaluation the Institute, the indicators for public healthcare entities included in the regulation of the Minister of Health has been applied. Results – The National Institute of Oncology conducts extensive research and develops innovative treatment methods that are practically used in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer. He actively participates in a task of exceptional importance for improving public health in Poland, i.e. the National Oncology Strategy. The difficult financial situation of the entity is gradually improving. Originality/value/implications/recommendations – The issue of medical research institutes is not handled in the literature on public health or public finance. Therefore, this publication fills the existing gap to some extent and is part of the series of articles devoted to the above‑mentioned issues, implemented by the authors. entities.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.022

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.218 · 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