MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2416744234 · doi:10.1002/msc.1146

Self‐Reported Barriers to Healthcare Access for Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients in Rural and Northern Saskatchewan: A Mixed Methods Study

2016· article· en· W2416744234 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Bindu Nair, René Schüler, Samuel A. Stewart, Regina M. Taylor‐Gjevre

Bibliographic record

VenueMusculoskeletal Care · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsMedicineFamily medicineThematic analysisPharmacyHealth careRheumatoid arthritisScale (ratio)PopulationPatient satisfactionNursingQualitative researchInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to identify potential barriers for access to medical and allied health services from the perspective of rural and Northern Saskatchewan rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. METHODS: A total of 100 adults with established RA, residing in rural and Northern Saskatchewan, were recruited from two rheumatology practices. Structured interviews with standardized scripts solicited patient perspectives on appointment waiting times, travel required to access medical services and satisfaction with healthcare provision. Thematic analysis was employed for qualitative data. RESULTS: Patients-reported concerns regarding waiting time for their first rheumatology appointment. There was reduced access to allied health professionals, with only 53% of the participants having seen a physiotherapist (PT), and only 26% an occupational therapist (OT). Patients had similar driving distances to their family physician, PT, pharmacy and laboratory services but commuted significantly further for rheumatologist and OT services. There were high levels of satisfaction with their rheumatologist and family physician appointments (8.96 and 8.04 on a ten-point scale). Patients with longer travel times had higher satisfaction with their health care appointments: Patients who travelled one, two and more than two hours had satisfaction scores of 0.93, 0.88 and 1.32 points higher on a ten-point scale (p < 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Access to medical services is a concern for this population. Patients were dissatisfied with the waiting time for their first specialist appointment and with decreased access to allied health professionals. Patients travelling longer distances were more satisfied with their health care provider's care, suggesting that good patient-care giver relationships helped to ameliorate the difficulties of travelling to their appointments. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations34
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMusculoskeletal CareSame topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesFrench-language works237,207