MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W808856221

“IV to PO Step-Down Program”的最新发展

2005· article· zh· W808856221 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
劳海燕, Min Yang

Bibliographic record

Venue中国处方药 · 2005
Typearticle
Languagezh
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

加拿大英属哥伦比亚省Fraser Health医疗机构药师执行的药物临床使用时给药途径由Ⅳ改为PO项目(Ⅳ to PO Step-Down Program),最初是作为Burnaby医院和Fraser南部医院(Langley、Peace和Surrey Memorial医院)2002年开始的一个试验性项目.到2003年5月这个项目已经扩大到Fraser Health医疗机构的其它的医院,包括Royal Columbian、Eagle Ridge、Ridge Meadows、Chilliwack General、MSA、Mission Memorial和Delta医院.关于新项目是如何运作及其效益情况,本文对该项目作简要介绍.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.003

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.314 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue中国处方药→Same topicPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes→French-language works237,207→