A67 EVALUATING ACCESS TO IBD CARE ACROSS CANADA: PROCEEDINGS FROM THE 2017 IBD ACCESS SUBMMIT
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) is a chronic, immune-mediated disease, with Canada demonstrating the highest incidence and prevalence rates in the world. Patients with IBD often require lifelong treatment and, therefore, lifelong interactions with the healthcare system. Access to care can have a direct impact on patient health-related outcomes. Although acknowledged as a problem, the complexity of accessing IBD specialty care in Canada has not been reviewed. This lack of understanding presents a barrier in evaluating and implementing changes in IBD specialty care. Aims To identify key barriers and facilitators for and to develop a national working strategy to address limitations in access to IBD specialty care by exploring the perceptions and experiences of key stakeholders (pediatric and adult gastroenterologists, IBD patients, researchers, and policy makers). Methods The IBD Summit was held in Toronto, Ontario in November 2017, sponsored by SPOR-CIHR catalyst funding and in partnership with Crohn’s & Colitis Canada. Perceptions and experiences of key stakeholders were gathered during two audio-recorded stakeholder dialogues held during the Summit. The audio recordings were transcribed and coded to compare and contrast between key stakeholders to determine potential differences in access to IBD care. Five final themes are highlighted in this report. Results A total of 21 key stakeholders attended, including pediatric and adult gastroenterologists, patients, researchers, and policy makers. Five key themes of importance relating to access to IBD care arose from The IBD Summit:(1) Integrated Models of Care, (2) IT Enhanced Care, (3) Health System Process, (4) Communication and Advocacy, and (5) Community Supports. The IBD Summit identified similar perceptions and experiences, highlighting common barriers and facilitators that transcend provincial borders. Shared perceptions included a need for common medical records and overall improved IT-enhanced care for managing IBD; improved centralized triage systems; increased comprehensive care support for patients and primary care physicians; and increased community supports for patients and providers. Conclusions Highlights from the IBD Summit present several clinically relevant and actionable suggestions for improved access to IBD speciality care across Canada. The suggestions provided by key stakeholders highlight the need for a system-level redesign in order to improve access to enhanced models of care. Improvements in access to IBD specialty care can only occur through partnerships between those working within the healthcare system and those within the community. Future research will involve pursuing deeper insight into the experience of patient and provider stakeholders as they navigate the healthcare system in order to access and provide care. Funding Agencies CIHRNova Scotia Health Authority Research Fund
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,014 | 0,021 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,018 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».