Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Chronic Care Model (CCM) is widely taken up as the universal operational framework for redesigning health systems to address the increasing chronic disease burden of an ageing population. Chronic care encompasses health promotion, prevention, self management, disease control, treatment and palliation to address 'chronicity' of long journeys through disease, illness and care in the varying contexts of complex health systems. Yet at an operational level, CCM activities are predominantly based on an evidence-base of discreet chronic disease interventions in specific settings; and their demonstrable impact is limited to processes of select disease management such as diabetes in specific disease management programs. AIMS: This paper proposes a framework that makes sense of the nature of chronicity and its multiple dimensions beyond disease and argues for a set of building blocks and leverage points that should constitute the starting points for 'redesign'? FINDINGS: Complex Adaptive Chronic Care is proposed as an idea for an explanatory and implementation framework for addressing chronicity in existing and future chronic care models. Chronicity is overtly conceptualized to encompass the phenomena of an individual journey, with simple and complicated, complex and chaotic phases, through long term asymptomatic disease to bodily dysfunction and illness, located in family and communities. Chronicity encompasses trajectories of self-care and health care, as health, illness and disease co-exist and co-evolve in the setting of primary care, local care networks and at times institutions. A systems approach to individuals in their multi-layered networks making sense of and optimizing experiences of their chronic illness would build on core values and agency around a local vision of health, empowerment of individuals and adaptive leadership, and it responds in line with the local values inherent in the community's disease-based knowledge and the local service's history and dynamics. Complex Adaptive Chronic Care exceeds the current notions of disease management as an endpoint. Primary care team members are system adaptors in partnership with individuals constructing their care and system leadership in response to chronic illness, and enable healthy resilience as well as personal healing and support. Outcomes of complex adaptive chronic care are the emergence of health in individuals and communities through adaptability, self-organization and empowerment. DISCUSSION: Chronic care reform from within a complex adaptive system framework is bottom up and emergent and stands in stark contrast to (but has to co-exist with) the prevailing protocol based disease care rewarding selective surrogate indicators of disease control. Frameworks such as the Chronic Care Model provide guidance, but do not replace individual experience, local adaptive leadership and responsiveness. The awareness of complexity means opening up problems to a different reality demanding different set of questions and approaches to answer them.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".