MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1647117351 · doi:10.5334/ijic.574

Ten years of integrated care: backwards and forwards. The case of the province of Québec, Canada

2011· article· en· W1647117351 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Isabelle Vedel, M. Monette, François Béland, Johanne Monette, Howard Bergman

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Integrated Care · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversité de MontréalJewish General HospitalMcGill University
KeywordsIntegrated careNursingCorporate governanceHealth careMedicineBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Québec's rapidly growing elderly and chronically ill population represents a major challenge to its healthcare delivery system, attributable in part to the system's focus on acute care and fragmented delivery. DESCRIPTION OF POLICY PRACTICE: Over the past few years, reforms have been implemented at the provincial policy level to integrate hospital-based, nursing home, homecare and social services in 95 catchment areas. Recent organizational changes in primary care have also resulted in the implementation of family medicine groups and network clinics. Several localized initiatives were also developed to improve integration of care for older persons or persons with chronic diseases. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION: Québec has a history of integration of health and social services at the structural level. Recent evaluations of the current reform show that the care provided by various institutions in the healthcare system is becoming better integrated. The Québec health care system nevertheless continues to face three important challenges in its management of chronic diseases: implementing the reorganization of primary care, successfully integrating primary and secondary care at the clinical level, and developing effective governance and change management. Efforts should focus on strengthening primary care by implementing nurse practitioners, developing a shared information system, and achieving better collaboration between primary and secondary care.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0280.009
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations64
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Integrated CareSame topicInterprofessional Education and CollaborationFrench-language works237,207