Observe, Coach, Assist, and Report: An Emerging Framework for Integrating Unregulated Healthcare Providers into Interdisciplinary Healthcare Teams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Unregulated healthcare providers known as personal support workers (PSWs) provide the majority of home care services in Ontario, Canada. However, there is little direction to guide their activities as members of interdisciplinary healthcare teams. The purpose of this study was to explore and describe the role of PSWs in interdisciplinary evidence-based stroke care.Methods and Findings: A concurrent triangulation mixed-methods design was used. Data sources included surveys (N = 270), chart audits (N = 234), interviews (N = 28), focus groups (N = 7), textbook review, an advisory committee (N = 14), and knowledge fairs (N = 112). PSWs can participate in team-based stroke care by observing vital information about clients in their homes, coaching clients to follow care plans, assisting to implement recommendations made by other healthcare providers, and reporting client progress, challenges, needs, and preferences to the healthcare team.Conclusions: The Observe, Coach, Assist, and Report (OCAR) themes have the potential to be used as a framework to guide improvements in intra-team communication, information sharing, and awareness of the PSW role, in order to support a more integrated home care experience for clients and families. Next steps include pilot testing the OCAR framework at the point of care in various settings to enhance interdisciplinary collaboration that is inclusive of PSWs.
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 | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".