System enablers and barriers to continuity of care for First Nations people living with chronic conditions: A rapid qualitative review protocol
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Maria Alejandra Pinero de Plaza1,2,3, Shannon Brown4, Chiung-Jung (Jo) Wu5,6, Robyn Clark1,3, Katharine McBride7,8, Lemlem Gebremichael1,3, Odette Pearson7,8,9, Sonia Hines3, Kim Morey7,8 1. Caring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, 5000. 2. Centre of Research Excellence in Frailty and Healthy Ageing, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, 5000. 3. The Mparntwe Centre for Evidence in Health, Flinders University: A JBI Centre of Excellence. Alice Springs, NT, 0871. 4. Library, Flinders University Adelaide, SA, 5000. 5. School of Nursing, Midwifery, and Paramedicine, University of the Sunshine Coast, Petrie, QLD, 4502. 6. Royal Brisbane & Women’s Hospital, QLD, 4029. 7. South Australian Aboriginal Chronic Disease Consortium, Adelaide, SA,5001. 8. Wardliparingga Aboriginal Health Equity Theme, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, SA, 5001. 9. Adelaide Medical School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, 5000. Abstract Objective: This rapid review aims to evaluate qualitative literature on the health system enablers and barriers to continuity of care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia and comparable Indigenous populations and countries (i.e., Māori people of New Zealand and First Nations people of Canada) (collectively referred to as First Nations people). Introduction: The First Nations people of Australia, New Zealand, and Canada experience lower life expectancy than their non-Indigenous counterparts, with chronic conditions contributing to approximately 70% of this disparity. Reduced access to health services and poorer care outcomes attributed to chronic diseases account for a significant proportion of this gap. The sub-optimal management of ongoing care when living with chronic conditions contributes to health disparities in these countries. The South Australian Aboriginal Chronic Disease Consortium identified a critical need to create a protocol, evidence-informed on continuity of care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people hospitalised for chronic disease. Reduced access to health services contributes to delayed detection of risk factors and disease, limited ongoing disease management, increased risk of potentially preventable hospitalisation, and complex care needs, often unmet following a hospitalisation. An investigation of qualitative literature on system enablers and barriers to continuity of care for First Nations populations with shared histories of colonisation will help inform evidence-based approaches to continuity of care. Inclusion criteria: This review will be focused on the qualitative and mixed-method studies that qualify enablers and barriers to continuity of care. It will consider frameworks, protocols, and designs concerning specific chronic conditions, which are the major contributors to health disparities, and the focus of the South Australian Aboriginal Chronic Disease Consortium: cancer, cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, and diabetes and its associated complications. An emphasis will be placed on the health system, healthcare providers, and other professionals related to continuity of care services or integration of care. Exclusion criteria: The work will exclude research that does not consider enablers and/or barriers to continuity of care or its integration. Quantitative studies and those considering chronic conditions outside this scope will be excluded. Methods: This rapid qualitative review will consider relevant primary qualitative and mixed-methods studies published in English between 2010 and June 2022. Key information sources to be searched for publications will be databases Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Central. Two reviewers will independently review titles and abstracts; relevant sources will be retrieved in full and reviewed. Any disagreements will be resolved through discussion or with one or more additional reviewers. Two independent reviewers will assess papers selected for retrieval for methodological quality using the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander quality appraisal tool before inclusion in the review. Relevant articles will be charted to summarise the extracted data. Findings will be explained inductively, in narrative and graphical forms, using the latest frameworks from The World Health Organisation as a lens but allowing themes to emerge from the data. Any deviations from this protocol will be justified and reported in the final review. Review registration number: PROSPERO ID=CRD42022339990 Keywords: Continuity of care; integration of care; chronic diseases; Aboriginal; Indigenous; First Nations People
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 | 0,128 | 0,102 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,007 | 0,006 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,007 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,053 | 0,008 |
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 ».