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 OpenAlex
Sue Bookey‐Bassett, Maureen Markle‐Reid, Colleen McKey, Noori Akhtar‐Danesh

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.821
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.073
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