Integrated care for adults with chronic musculoskeletal disorders: scoping review protocol
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objective: This protocol aims to guide the process to conduct scoping review on synthesizing the extent of the use, approaches, and evidence behind the implementation of integrated care approaches for people with chronic musculoskeletal disorders. Introduction: Evidence shows that care for people with chronic musculoskeletal (MSK) disorders is fragmented and siloed among different services and providers. In Canada, services are rarely integrated presenting challenges for people with the condition to access timely and appropriate health and social care. Urgent improvements are needed within the health care delivery system to support people with the chronic MSK disorders to manage their condition, such as enhancing diagnosis, better information, reducing wait times to see specialists, improving referrals and ensuring access to services. Integrated care is an emerging approach to delivering person-centred, high-quality care, and has been widely implemented to support people with various chronic health conditions. An integrated care approach requires transformation of health and social services to address the complexity of care and deliver people-centred care. However, the extent to which integrated care is utilized to support individuals with chronic MSK disorders remains limited. Methods: This scoping review will include studies conducted on integrated care delivered for people with chronic MSK conditions across various health care settings (e.g., primary, secondary, tertiary) and/ or geographical location (countries). The review will adhere to the scoping review methodology suggested by the Joanna Briggs Institute. Relevant databases such as Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycINFO, will be thoroughly searched to identify articles relevant to the review objectives. Grey literature databases (e.g., Google Scholar) will also be explored for relevant studies. Only articles published in English language will be considered. Identified articles will be exported to Covidence software to remove duplicates and conduct the analysis. Two reviewers will independently review the selected articles and extract data using the data extraction tool developed for the purpose of this scoping review. The analysis will involve numerical and descriptive summaries of the selected articles and will be presented using graphs and tables in alignment with PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews. Discussion and next steps: The literature search phase of the scoping review is progress. Our search strategies are expected to yield relevant studies to guide the next steps of the scoping review process. We intend to present details on the scoping review protocol for this project, including the keywords and search terms, databases searched, and the latest progresses on the review at the International Conference on Integrated Care conference (ICIC24) in Belfast, Northern Ireland. This work will be of relevance to conference attendees with interest in implementing and evaluating integrated care for people with chronic MSK disorders. Patient and caregiver engagement: One of our research team members is a person with the lived experience of chronic pain and serves as a caregiver for an individual with the same condition. This team member has actively participated in designing the protocol (e.g., formulating the research questions) and will continue to contribute to data analysis, and writing, and disseminating the results.
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 | 0,131 | 0,107 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,010 | 0,011 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,018 | 0,018 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,011 | 0,011 |
| Science ouverte | 0,007 | 0,010 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,009 | 0,009 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,082 | 0,019 |
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 ».