MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Complex adaptive chronic care

2009· article· en· W1963534537 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsNOSM University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiseaseHealth carePsychological interventionMedicineChronic careChronic diseasePopulationComplex adaptive systemIntensive care medicinePsychologyNursingComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.221
GPT teacher head0.545
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