MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399802267 · doi:10.1097/jce.0000000000000657

Safety Verification Procedure in the Implementation of Alternative Equipment Maintenance at The Ottawa Hospital

2024· article· en· W4399802267 on OpenAlexaffabout
Maryam Sangargir, Joël Brose

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicQuality and Safety in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsCanadian Association of Occupational Therapists
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceReliability engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores safety verifications in The Ottawa Hospital’s alternative Equipment Management (AEM) project, focusing on optimizing resource use and maintaining patient safety. This methodology includes integrating World Health Organization guidelines, establishing a dedicated AEM Committee, and a safety verification process using failure codes. The article consists of a case study on The Ottawa Hospital Civic Campus Floor Scales to further illustrate the AEM safety verification process.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.422 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical EngineeringSame topicQuality and Safety in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207