Telehomecare: A Comparison of Three Canadian Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The delivery of health care is often segmented into sectors. In Canada, hospital care has traditionally been distinct from community care, and thus the transition of patients across sectors has been challenging. This paper focuses on the systematic development of an integrated model of care for children, for the purpose of smoothing the transition from hospital to home. The new service model uses emerging telecommunications technology to link hospital care providers to patients at home and is termed "telehomecare" (THC). Independent models of THC were developed for three sites across Canada through semistructured interviews and focus groups. Participants included health care providers and administrators from the hospital and community, and patient families. The resulting models were compared using content analysis to determine whether there was a core model of THC that was generalisable across Canada. A core model of THC was identified that includes the use of videoconferencing to enable the integration of hospital- and community-based care to support patients during the initial stages of the transition to home. Each site also articulated unique characteristics in their service model that were related to the nature of their health care delivery system and patient population. This paper describes the core model of transitional care, presents a synopsis of each of the three models, and compares the models. THC provides opportunities to address limitations in the current system and to improve upon equity of access to quality care for children making the transition from hospital to home.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".