A Bayesian framework for word segmentation: Exploring the effects of context

Since the experiments of Saffran et al. (1996a), there has been a great deal of interest in the question of how statistical regularities in the speech stream might be used by infants to begin to identify individual words. In this work, we use computational modeling to explore the effects of different assumptions the learner might make regarding the nature of words – in particular, how these assumptions affect the kinds of words that are segmented from a corpus of transcribed child-directed speech. We develop several models within a Bayesian ideal observer framework, and use them to examine the consequences of assuming either that words are independent units, or units that help to predict other units. We show through empirical and theoretical results that the assumption of independence causes the learner to undersegment the corpus, with many two- and three-word sequences (e.g. what’s that, do you, in the house) misidentified as individual words. In contrast, when the learner assumes that words are predictive, the resulting segmentation is far more accurate. These results indicate that taking context into account is important for a statistical word segmentation strategy to be successful, and raise the possibility that even young infants may be able to exploit more subtle statistical patterns than have usually been considered.

What is the value and impact of quality and safety teams? A scoping review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The purpose of this study was to conduct a scoping review of the literature about the establishment and impact of quality and safety team initiatives in acute care.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Studies were identified through electronic searches of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ABI Inform, Cochrane databases. Grey literature and bibliographies were also searched. Qualitative or quantitative studies that occurred in acute care, describing how quality and safety teams were established or implemented, the impact of teams, or the barriers and/or facilitators of teams were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data on study design, sample, interventions, and outcomes. Quality assessment of full text articles was done independently by two reviewers. Studies were categorized according to dimensions of quality.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 6,674 articles identified, 99 were included in the study. The heterogeneity of studies and results reported precluded quantitative data analyses. Findings revealed limited information about attributes of successful and unsuccessful team initiatives, barriers and facilitators to team initiatives, unique or combined contribution of selected interventions, or how to effectively establish these teams.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Not unlike systematic reviews of quality improvement collaboratives, this broad review revealed that while teams reported a number of positive results, there are many methodological issues. This study is unique in utilizing traditional quality assessment and more novel methods of quality assessment and reporting of results (SQUIRE) to appraise studies. Rigorous design, evaluation, and reporting of quality and safety team initiatives are required.</p