MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2410138007 · doi:10.1097/nna.0000000000000265

Implications of the Patient-Centered Medical Home for Nursing Practice

2015· article· en· W2410138007 on OpenAlexaff
Kenda R. Stewart, Greg L. Stewart, Michelle A. Lampman, Bonnie J. Wakefield, Gary E. Rosenthal, Samantha L. Solimeo

Bibliographic record

VenueJONA The Journal of Nursing Administration · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsL'Alliance Boviteq
FundersU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsNursingFormative assessmentMedical homePactVeterans AffairsMedicineWork (physics)Health carePhysician assistantsNurse practitionersPsychologyFamily medicinePrimary carePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The experiences of RNs and licensed practical nurses (LPNs) implementing a patient-centered medical home (PCMH) in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care clinics were examined to understand model implications for nursing practice and professional identity. BACKGROUND: National implementation of the PCMH model, called patient-aligned care teams (PACTs) in VA, emphasizes areas of nursing expertise, yet little is known about the effect of medical homes on the day-to-day work of nurses. METHODS: As part of a formative evaluation to identify barriers and facilitators to PACT implementation, we interviewed 18 nurses implementing PACT. RESULTS: Challenges to nurse's organizational and professional roles were experienced differently by RNs and LPNs in the following areas: (1) diversified modes of care and expanded clinical duties, (2) division of labor among PACT nurses, and (3) interprofessional status in the team. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare managers implementing PCMH should consider its inherent cultural and practice transformations.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.840
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.344 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJONA The Journal of Nursing AdministrationSame topicPrimary Care and Health OutcomesFrench-language works237,207