Reforming primary healthcare: from public policy to organizational change
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
PURPOSE: Governments everywhere are implementing reform to improve primary care. However, the existence of a high degree of professional autonomy makes large-scale change difficult to achieve. The purpose of this paper is to elucidate the change dynamics and the involvement of professionals in a primary healthcare reform initiative carried out in the Canadian province of Quebec. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: An empirical approach was used to investigate change processes from the inception of a public policy to the execution of changes in professional practices. The data were analysed from a multi-level, combined contextualist-processual perspective. Results are based on a longitudinal multiple-case study of five family medicine groups, which was informed by over 100 interviews, questionnaires, and documentary analysis. FINDINGS: The results illustrate the multiple processes observed with the introduction of planned large-scale change in primary care services. The analysis of change content revealed that similar post-change states concealed variations between groups in the scale of their respective changes. The analysis also demonstrated more precisely how change evolved through the introduction of "intermediate change" and how cycles of prescribed and emergent mechanisms distinctively drove change process and change content, from the emergence of the public policy to the change in primary care service delivery. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: This research was conducted among a limited number of early policy adopters. However, given the international interest in turning to the medical profession to improve primary care, the results offer avenues for both policy development and implementation. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The findings offer practical insights for those studying and managing large-scale transformations. They provide a better understanding of how deliberate reforms coexist with professional autonomy through an intertwining of change content and processes. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This research is one of few studies to examine a primary care reform from emergence to implementation using a longitudinal multi-level design.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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