"Technology is the enabler Enhancing “one team, one record, one number, one fund” and connecting Home Care utilization to outcomes for patients and providers”.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Since 2012, St. Joseph’s Health System has been testing and evaluating Integrated Models of Care while maintaining a focused commitment to spreading and scaling sustainable integrated service delivery and integrated funding models. Our collective learnings and expanding partnerships are being celebrated through the creation of the SJHS Centre for Integrated Care. The Centre for Integrated Care, or “CIC”, is an innovation incubator and accelerator powered by the St. Joseph’s Health System (SJHS), the Research Institute of St. Joe's Hamilton, and the partners we work with. We believe getting timely and adequate care should be less complicated: fewer steps, less confusion, less wasted effort, more sharing, and more time to spend with people. Integrated care means integrating people who provide care and the systems they use. We prefer practical and simple innovations that fit within existing resources. Our mission is to integrate systems and remove barriers to advance people-centred care. Our hub includes patients, families/caregivers, care providers, health care leaders, researchers, educators, and technology experts who are united in one goal: to improve the delivery of health and social services for better outcomes. During the presentation we will describe our Integrated Comprehensive Care (ICC) Program for COPD and CHF patients and highlight how the work and in particular the technology, has enabled integration at the micro, meso, and macro levels with a specific focus on equity, access, and provider experience. We will touch on learnings from the pandemic and provide a visual representation linking actual volume and type of home care utilization to outcomes both the year prior to the pandemic and two years during the pandemic; Understanding service delivery trends is important to understanding how resources are contributing to an outcome, such as community staffing decisions impacting hospital lengths of stay. Discussion begins with best practice care standards and pathways. Funding constraints are secondary. The ongoing dialogue between and within acute and home and community care serves to educate and adjust practice as the evidence directs. This approach comes from establishing a shared vision, transparency, trust, and hard work upfront when developing programs. As opposed to command and control, it’s a collective goal to provide the best care within the existing resources and be open to shuffling resources, and looking at other ways of delivering care, including the use of technology, to provide services. Time permitting, we will engage participants in discussions around how we can collectively advance integrated care and suggest opportunities for moving forward. At the end of the day, technology is not the driver in health care. Rather, care is enabled by technology – to support remote access, consistent practice, easily accessible synchronous documentation, ongoing refinement of best practice, and much more. It is essential to the future of health care, meeting client expectations and supporting practitioners to give their best.
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 | 0,012 | 0,023 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,013 |
| Communication savante | 0,011 | 0,014 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,012 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,022 | 0,009 |
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 ».