Experiences of inpatient healthcare services among children with medical complexity: A scoping review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Children with medical complexity (CMC) have multiple chronic conditions in addition to highly complex care needs. The population of CMC has increased considerably in the recent decade and has among the highest health care utilization in pediatrics. CMC and their parental caregivers' experiences of care differ in important ways from other populations and CMC and their parental caregivers have reported poor experiences of care when compared to other pediatric populations. Importantly, CMC are at increased risk of adverse events during their hospitalizations. Objective: The objective of this review is to map the existing literature related to CMC and their parental caregivers’ experiences of receiving inpatient healthcare services, and to identify important knowledge gaps. Inclusion criteria: This review will include studies pertaining to the experiences of healthcare services for CMC, along with their parental caregivers, in the inpatient hospital setting. In our review, CMC are defined as children with (a) multiple chronic conditions, (b) high health care utilization, (c) high care needs in the home and community, and (c) functional limitations. Experiences of health care is described as interactions shaped by an organization's culture that influence patients' perceptions across the continuum of care. Unique settings, such as the NICU and mental health units, and populations, such as medically fragile infants, will be excluded. Methods: Using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, articles related to CMC and the inpatient care setting will be identified through EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, MEDLINE and PsycInfo. Search period will be from the year 2000 to the current date. All types of research designs will be included but not grey literature. Studies will be limited to English. Screening of titles, abstracts and full-text articles will be conducted by two independent researchers. Disagreements will be resolved by discussion with a third researcher. Data will be extracted using a data extraction form including authors, country, participants, objectives, methodology, setting and key findings. Articles will be appraised with the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies (COREQ), Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for cohort and case-control studies and the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) for randomized controlled trials. Data tables and figures will be created to map and present data, and themes from data will be presented in a narrative summary. Significance: This review will aid in developing a comprehensive understanding of inpatient experiences of care for CMC and their parental caregivers. This understanding will contribute to further research on the development of models of care and potential interventional research projects among CMC and their parental caregivers in inpatient hospital settings. Collating and mapping this evidence is necessary to determine critical aspects of experiences of care that will help prioritize health services interventions and evaluation, as well as identify areas that require further investigation.
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 | 0,005 | 0,027 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,013 | 0,019 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 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 ».