Data Evaluation Model Using GQM Approach

Author(s):  
Julieta Calabrese ◽  
Silvia Esponda ◽  
Ariel Pasini ◽  
Patricia Pesado
PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. e0259156
Author(s):  
Edward J. Gregr ◽  
Dana R. Haggarty ◽  
Sarah C. Davies ◽  
Cole Fields ◽  
Joanne Lessard

Maps of bottom type are essential to the management of marine resources and biodiversity because of their foundational role in characterizing species’ habitats. They are also urgently needed as countries work to define marine protected areas. Current approaches are time consuming, focus largely on grain size, and tend to overlook shallow waters. Our random forest classification of almost 200,000 observations of bottom type is a timely alternative, providing maps of coastal substrate at a combination of resolution and extents not previously achieved. We correlated the observations with depth, depth-derivatives, and estimates of energy to predict marine substrate at 100 m resolution for Canada’s Pacific shelf, a study area of over 135,000 km2. We built five regional models with the same data at 20 m resolution. In addition to standard tests of model fit, we used three independent data sets to test model predictions. We also tested for regional, depth, and resolution effects. We guided our analysis by asking: 1) does weighting for prevalence improve model predictions? 2) does model resolution influence model performance? And 3) is model performance influenced by depth? All our models fit the build data well with true skill statistic (TSS) scores ranging from 0.56 to 0.64. Weighting models with class prevalence improved fit and the correspondence with known spatial features. Class-based metrics showed differences across both resolutions and spatial regions, indicating non-stationarity across these spatial categories. Predictive power was lower (TSS from 0.10 to 0.36) based on independent data evaluation. Model performance was also a function of depth and resolution, illustrating the challenge of accurately representing heterogeneity. Our work shows the value of regional analyses to assessing model stationarity and how independent data evaluation and the use of error metrics can improve understanding of model performance and sampling bias.


2018 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 11-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heloise Pieterse ◽  
Martin Olivier ◽  
Renier van Heerden

2021 ◽  
Vol 1883 (1) ◽  
pp. 012113
Author(s):  
Lin Li ◽  
Fang Qin ◽  
Can Wang ◽  
Jianyan Sun ◽  
WeiJia Zeng ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 526-542 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hideki Goda ◽  
Eriko Sasaki ◽  
Kenji Akiyama ◽  
Akiko Maruyama-Nakashita ◽  
Kazumi Nakabayashi ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 0 (ja) ◽  
pp. 080414150319983 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hideki Goda ◽  
Eriko Sasaki ◽  
Kenji Akiyama ◽  
Akiko Maruyama-Nakashita ◽  
Kazumi Nakabayashi ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 971-976
Author(s):  
Imran Musaji ◽  
Trisha Self ◽  
Karissa Marble-Flint ◽  
Ashwini Kanade

Purpose The purpose of this article was to propose the use of a translational model as a tool for identifying limitations of current interprofessional education (IPE) research. Translational models allow researchers to clearly define next-step research needed to translate IPE to interprofessional practice (IPP). Method Key principles, goals, and limitations of current IPE research are reviewed. A popular IPE evaluation model is examined through the lens of implementation research. The authors propose a new translational model that more clearly illustrates translational gaps that can be used to direct future research. Next steps for translating IPE to IPP are discussed. Conclusion Comprehensive reviews of the literature show that the implementation strategies adopted to date have fostered improved buy-in from key stakeholders, as evidenced by improved attitudes and perceptions toward interprofessional collaboration/practice. However, there is little evidence regarding successful implementation outcomes, such as changed clinician behaviors, changed organizational practices, or improved patient outcomes. The authors propose the use of an IPE to IPP translational model to facilitate clear identification of research gaps and to better identify future research targets.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document