Regional models of care for systemic therapy: Standards for organization and delivery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
17057 Background: Rapidly expanding indications for cancer systemic therapy combined with human resource and facility constraints require innovative approaches to deliver safe, patient-centred, and evidence-based care across Ontario, a province covering 1 million sq km, organized into 14 regions, each with about 1 million inhabitants. A systemic therapy project team recommended the best way to organize the delivery of ambulatory systemic therapy in Ontario. Methods: A core multidisciplinary panel reviewed the evidence and developed standards. The panel used evidence-based analysis of relevant publications, an environmental scan of other existing recommendations and expert opinion based on experience and consensus to formulate a standards document to guide treatment delivery. This was reviewed and amended by the full project team. The document was circulated to oncologists, family practitioners, internists, pharmacists, nurses and administrators who work in or have responsibility for systemic therapy in the regions for practitioner feedback. Results: A Regional Systemic Therapy Program (STP) Model was developed in which Integrated Cancer programs (ICPs) provide comprehensive cancer services, leadership of quality and overall organisation/coordination for the region. STPs include ICPs directly linked to satellite centres and also affiliated to centres with their own systemic therapy programs to provide appropriate systemic therapy services for all regions under a common set of standards. Five levels of care are recommended, with complexity and availability of services differentiating the levels. For each level, standards were established for; 1-Providers and their roles, 2-Education for providers, 3-Service type and complexity, 4-Service volumes, 5- Quality assurance and safety, 6-Facility requirements, 7-Administrative and organizational responsibilities. The intent is to provide the same standard of care in the most appropriate setting within the appropriate time frame. STPs will implement, monitor and evaluate quality indicators. Conclusions: A detailed review of the document including results of practitioner feedback as well as survey results from the 14 STPs to determine whether standards are being currently met will be presented. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
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 | 0.141 | 0.139 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
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".