MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392810653 · doi:10.53555/sfs.v10i6.2326

Creating 'Win-Win' Outcomes For Patients With Low Health Literacy: A Nursing Case Study

2023· article· en· W4392810653 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nasser Fandi Sumayhan Alanazi, Mohammed Matar Nazal Al-Enezi, Arwa Mohammed Hassan Makin, Alanoud Humaidi Rakyan Alanazi, Badriah Khalid Aydh Almutairi, Fawziah Khaled Almutairi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Survey in Fisheries Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth literacyLiteracyNursingMedicinePsychologyBusinessMedical educationHealth carePedagogyEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Health literacy is a critical factor in patient outcomes and healthcare delivery. Patients with low health literacy face significant challenges in understanding their healthcare needs and navigating the complex healthcare system. This case study explores strategies for creating 'win-win' outcomes for patients with low health literacy through the lens of a nursing perspective. By utilizing patient-centered care, health education, and clear communication, nurses can empower patients with low health literacy to make informed decisions about their health and improve their overall outcomes.

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 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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.256
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Survey in Fisheries SciencesSame topicHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityFrench-language works237,207