Family doctors and psychologists working together: doctors' and patients' perspectives
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Strategies to improve primary care in the Canadian Primary Care Reform include integrating different professionals to the medical team. OBJECTIVE: This demonstration project explores the perceived impact on doctors and patients, of having family doctors and psychologists work together. SETTING: Two family practices of Eastern Ontario, Canada METHODS: Two board certified psychologists (one per practice) were integrated in the practices for 12 months. Psychologists conducted assessments, consultations and short-term treatments, as well as knowledge-transfer sessions for doctors. Outcome measures included referral patterns, patient outcomes, patient and provider satisfaction as well as doctors' billing. RESULTS: Three hundred and seventy-six participants received psychological care; most were women (68%) and between the ages of 25-64 (67%). Anxiety and depression were the most prevalent diagnoses. Reasons for referral included: psychological treatment (70%); emotional support and counselling (35%); clarification of diagnosis and case conceptualization (25%). Referrals could be for more than one reason. After intervention, 60% of patients had improvement on the outcome questionnaire-45 (OQ-45). Quality of life as measured by the EuroQol-5D also improved (P < 0.001). Over 77% of patients reported increased confidence in handling their problems after treatment. Compared with their family doctor, patients felt the psychologist had more time and was better trained (75%) Doctors felt mental health problems were diagnosed more rapidly, patient care improved as well as their own knowledge of psychological management and treatment. Doctors felt it freed up their time and improved working conditions. Audit of the doctors' billing showed reduction in doctors' mental health billing. CONCLUSIONS: Having an on-site psychologist was highly satisfactory for patients and providers, resulting in improved patient care and outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it