The Geriatrics 5M's: A New Way of Communicating What We Do
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Over the past few decades, specialists in geriatric medicine have created and disseminated evidence-based management approaches for an increasing number of health conditions. Geriatrics care models inform practice in all health settings. Many of these advances were first reported in the pages of this journal.1 Despite these significant successes, geriatrics remains unrecognized and underappreciated by our colleagues, health system leaders, and the public. It is likely that one factor accounting for our obscurity is our failure to define and communicate our value to society and ourselves. Those outside the field have difficulty understanding what geriatrics is and what geriatricians do. We contribute to this lack of clarity. We are experts in complexity but are often bad at communicating simply. Our well-intentioned efforts to be inclusive and comprehensive lead to the creation of long, complex descriptions of what we do that further compromises understanding while eroding interest in, and support of, our field. In 2013, Dr. George Heckman suggested that, rather than developing complex, comprehensive definitions, we focus on a few core competencies and package them in a manner that will resonate with the public and with decision-makers.2 Such an approach will not capture 100% of what geriatricians do, but it is likely that the “branding” of our specialty will improve its visibility while enhancing understanding of our unique contribution to health care. On April 21, 2017, Dr. Mary Tinetti gave the keynote address at the Canadian Geriatrics Society Annual meeting in Toronto, Canada. During that address, she presented the concept of the Geriatric 5Ms—a communication framework to describe core competencies in geriatrics in a manner that those inside and outside the field will understand and remember. The 5Ms represent a serendipitous convergence of two independent efforts: one which occurred in Ottawa, Canada in 2015 which resulted in the “4Ms” representing Mind, Mobility, Medications and Multicomplexity, and the other activities in the United States during 2016 through the Institute for Healthcare Improvement–led Age-Friendly Health System initiative, spearheaded and supported by the John A. Hartford Foundation.3 The consolidated Geriatric 5Ms (which not coincidentally can be counted on the fingers of one hand) are Mind, Mobility, Medications, Multicomplexity, and Matters Most to Me. To learn about them, go to www.geriatricsjournal.ca → Update: The Public Launch of the Geriatric 5Ms (April 28, 2017).4 The Geriatric 5Ms concept is a simply conveyed yet comprehensive training and communication tool that allows us to communicate our expertise in easily understood and remembered terms. We hope members of geriatrics associations around the world find the Geriatric 5Ms helpful in their advocacy, communication, and training efforts to enhance our visibility and forge a collective identity. Conflict of Interest: The authors declare no competing interests. Author Contributions: All authors contributed equally to the writing and editing of the manuscript. Sponsor's Role: There was no sponsor for this manuscript.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle