MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6991775359

Implementación de la Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) en el departamento de atención médica continua (AMC)

2015· other· es· W6991775359 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDSpace (Universidad Veracruzana) · 2015
Typeother
Languagees
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriageEmergency departmentScale (ratio)Time lagPatient care
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Insuficiencia respiratoria y gravedad para los servicios de urgencias 
\n(Canadian Emergency Departament Triage and Acuity Scale: CTAS) 
\nestablece el nivel de triage y el índice de ingreso hospitalario. Los 
\ncanadienses han demostrado puede ser aplicada por médicos, enfermeras y 
\nparamédicos. El objetivo del Triage no consiste en diagnósticar sino en 
\npriorizar, clasiflcar y ubicar correctamente a los pacientes en las diferentes 
\náreas o niveles...

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.004

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.292 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDSpace (Universidad Veracruzana)French-language works237,207