Towards a working-definition of patient-centred Measurement: A review of literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Between March and June, 2018 a review of academic and grey literature was conducted to explore the meaning of patient-centred measurement (PCM). The research question guiding the review was: “How has patient-centred measurement been defined?” This report presents the findings arising from the review with the goal of arriving at a working definition of PCM to inform plans and activities that will be undertaken by the British Columbia SUPPORT Unit’s Patient-Centred Measurement Methods Cluster (the PCM Methods Cluster). By targeting the focus of the PCM Methods Cluster, the value of the research and application work to be supported by the Methods Cluster will be maximized and will fulfill the overarching goal of establishing evidenced-based methods related to patient-centred measurement in the context of the Canadian Institute for Health Research’s Strategy for Patient-oriented Research (SPOR).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.097 | 0.186 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.039 | 0.048 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".