Patient and care partner perceptions of the new Multispecialty Interprofessional Team primary care‐based memory clinics across four Canadian provinces
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Multispecialty Interprofessional Team (MINT) Memory Clinics manage dementia and other memory disorders at a primary care-level. Established in Ontario, with over 100 clinics, this care model has recently expanded to four other Canadian provinces. This study describes patient and care partner experience with this new care model. METHODS: Satisfaction surveys were distributed in 14 newly established clinics, across four Canadian provinces, to patients and care partners following their clinic assessment. Survey completion was anonymous. Five-point rating scales ("strongly disagree" to "strongly agree") were used to rate appointment timeliness, quality of explanations, satisfaction with time spent, understanding of symptoms/ condition, willingness to recommend the clinic to others, value of the clinic in addition to regular primary care; overall satisfaction with the visit was measured ("very dissatisfied" to "very satisfied"). Qualitive analysis of an open-ended comment question captured respondents' perceptions about the visit. RESULTS: Satisfaction surveys were completed by 338 out of 748 individuals (45%) over six months: 162 patients, 169 care partners, 7 did not specify. There were no statistically significant differences in ratings between patients and care partners. The majority of respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with their clinic visit (88%). The majority of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they received an appointment in good time (95%), their questions were adequately addressed (93%), they were satisfied with the amount of time the team spent with them (95%), they had a better understanding of the condition (88%), they would recommend the memory clinic to others (94%), and the clinic was value added to their regular primary care (94%). Analysis of the open-ended question identified that respondents valued having access to the clinic, the team approach, team members' expertise and caring demeanor, and the comfortable assessment atmosphere. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates high levels of patient and care partner satisfaction with MINT memory clinic care across 14 clinics in 4 provinces. This model meets the needs of individuals and families living with dementia and other memory disorders and offers a significant opportunity to build capacity within primary care for timely access to comprehensive, multispecialty memory assessment and care across Canada.
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 | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 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 ».