MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2524553079 · doi:10.1111/jan.13162

Understanding interprofessional collaboration in the context of chronic disease management for older adults living in communities: a concept analysis

2016· review· en· W2524553079 on OpenAlexaff
Sue Bookey‐Bassett, Maureen Markle‐Reid, Colleen McKey, Noori Akhtar‐Danesh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLContext (archaeology)NursingTeamworkMEDLINEMedicineDisease managementMultidisciplinary approachInterprofessional educationHealth careDiseasePsychologyPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To report a concept analysis of interprofessional collaboration in the context of chronic disease management, for older adults living in communities. BACKGROUND: Increasing prevalence of chronic disease among older adults is creating significant burden for patients, families and healthcare systems. Managing chronic disease for older adults living in the community requires interprofessional collaboration across different health and other care providers, organizations and sectors. However, there is a lack of consensus about the definition and use of interprofessional collaboration for community-based chronic disease management. DESIGN: Concept analysis. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases CINAHL, Medline, HealthStar, EMBASE, PsychINFO, Ageline and Cochrane Database were searched from 2000 - 2013. METHODS: Rodgers' evolutionary method for concept analysis. RESULTS: The most common surrogate term was interdisciplinary collaboration. Related terms were interprofessional team, multidisciplinary team and teamwork. Attributes included: an evolving interpersonal process; shared goals, decision-making and care planning; interdependence; effective and frequent communication; evaluation of team processes; involving older adults and family members in the team; and diverse and flexible team membership. Antecedents comprised: role awareness; interprofessional education; trust between team members; belief that interprofessional collaboration improves care; and organizational support. Consequences included impacts on team composition and function, care planning processes and providers' knowledge, confidence and job satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Interprofessional collaboration is a complex evolving concept. Key components of interprofessional collaboration in chronic disease management for community-living older adults are identified. Implications for nursing practice, education and research are proposed.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.008
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.012
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.420 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations105
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced NursingSame topicInterprofessional Education and CollaborationFrench-language works237,207