MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2563150651 · doi:10.1161/str.44.suppl_1.atp355

Abstract TP355: Supporting and Sustaining Systems Change Through the Development of Common Standards of Stroke Care

2013· article· en· W2563150651 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sylvia Quant, Jocelyne McKellar, Donna Cheung, Elizabeth Linkewich

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing Diagnosis and Documentation
Canadian institutionsOntario Stroke Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThematic analysisRehabilitationStroke (engine)Best practiceNursingStandardizationAcute strokeWork (physics)Qualitative researchEmergency departmentPhysical therapyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/Issues: The Stroke Flow initiative is a system-wide redesign of stroke services to enhance access to stroke best practices. Specifically, its focus is to ensure access to acute stroke units and timely and appropriate rehabilitation. To support this work, the Toronto Stroke Networks (TSNs) held forums with stroke nursing leaders (SNLs) within the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). Purpose: Through these forums, the purpose of this work was to develop evidenced-informed common standards of stroke care across the continuum and set priorities for implementation within the GTA. Methods: Six forums (from December 2011 to June 2012) were held for 43 SNLs from 16 acute and rehabilitation hospitals within the GTA. Using an appreciative inquiry approach, meetings focused on: 1) identifying common core elements (CCEs) for stroke care; 2) validating CCEs through consultation with interprofessional stroke teams; 3) forming consensus on CCEs; 4) identifying organizational priorities for implementation planning using thematic analysis; 5) integrating CCEs into existing processes of care; and 6) sustaining this work through the establishment of a stroke community of practice. Results: Through collaborative planning, CCEs were developed and reflect current and emerging best practices. Preliminary results from thematic analysis identified priorities related to: transitions of care, improved team communication processes, patient/family education, and integration of outcome measures across the care continuum. Conclusions: Common core elements of stroke care were collectively developed by the TSNs, stroke nursing leaders, and interprofessional teams to promote a standardization of stroke care that integrates best practices and identifies areas for improvement. Impact of this work has led to the development of CCE documents to support the integration and standardization of stroke care and the establishment of a stroke nursing community of practice. Final thematic analysis is currently underway to further identify priorities for implementation.

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)0.000
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.372
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicNursing Diagnosis and DocumentationFrench-language works237,207