MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1867122318

Frail elderly patients. New model for integrated service delivery.

2003· article· en· W1867122318 on OpenAlexaff
Réjean Hébert, Pierre Durand, Nicole Dubuc, André Tourigny

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutonomyService delivery frameworkProcess managementService providerService (business)Process (computing)MedicineKnowledge managementNursingBusinessOperations managementComputer scienceMarketingEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PROBLEM BEING ADDRESSED: Given the complex needs of frail older people and the multiplicity of care providers and services, care for this clientele lacks continuity. OBJECTIVE OF PROGRAM: Integrated service delivery (ISD) systems have been developed to improve continuity and increase the efficacy and efficiency of services. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The Program of Research to Integrate Services for the Maintenance of Autonomy (PRISMA) is an innovative ISD model based on coordination. It includes coordination between decision makers and managers of different organizations and services; a single entry point; a case-management process; individualized service plans; a single assessment instrument based on clients' functional autonomy, coupled with a case-mix classification system; and a computerized clinical chart for communicating between institutions and professionals for client monitoring. CONCLUSION: Preliminary results on the efficacy of this model showed a decreased incidence of functional decline, a decreased burden for caregivers, and a smaller proportion of older people wishing to enter institutions.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations65
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207