MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390942782 · doi:10.5334/ijic.icic23711

What is the Role of the Third Sector in Integrated Care - Provider, Partner or Both?

2023· article· en· W4390942782 on OpenAlexaff
Michelle Nelson, Marianne Saragosa, Robin Miller, Richard Lewanczuk

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Integrated Care · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic relationsIntegrated careValue propositionVoluntary sectorService providerValue (mathematics)Health careSession (web analytics)Order (exchange)Public sectorService (business)BusinessSociologyMarketingPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To date, much of the integrated care literature and discourse regarding the Third Sector (e.g. community based nongovernmental, charitable, or voluntary agencies) have positioned the sector as service providers and/or system partners. We would argue that while these organizations are undoubtedly equipped to effectively respond to community’s needs, the sector and these agencies are often been characterized as lesser partners and viewed as 'nice to have' rather than core players within integrated health systems. Optimizing their engagement requires a more nuanced understanding of the nature, feasibility, and high value models of collaboration between public and third sectors in order to to design and deliver integrated care systems. The purpose of this interactive workshop is to discuss the current role of third sector organizations in integrated care and debate the merit and/or limitations of being seen as a system partner or a service provider; is there a value proposition for both positions? The session will be structured to enable both large and small group structured conversations through deliberative dialogue and table debates. Attendees can expect to be engaged in a provocative dialogue that aims to push our understanding of how we can achieve truly integrated health care with local voluntary and community organizations. Our exchange will likely produce diverse opinions that will be synthesized according to common themes across and within the group and serve as the basis of potential future SIG activities and academic research. This 90 minute session is designed for any academic, policy maker or practitioner interested in intersectoral partnerships and integration across health, social and voluntary sectors. Format: The time will be divided between an introductory overview, a teams of thought leaders will identify and raise key topic concepts followed by a series of table discussions, debates with time to share and synthesize.

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)0.058
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0580.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.035
Scholarly communication0.0430.043
Open science0.0030.019
Research integrity0.0120.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.315 · 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
GenreOther

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 venueInternational Journal of Integrated CareSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207