Team-based innovations in primary care delivery in Quebec and timely physician follow-up after hospital discharge: a population-based cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Outpatient follow-up has been a key intervention point in addressing gaps in care after hospital discharge. We sought to estimate the association between enrolment in new team-based primary care practices and 30-day postdischarge physician follow-up among older patients and patients with chronic illnesses who were admitted to hospital in Quebec, Canada. METHODS: Patients were selected into this cohort if a primary care physician enrolled them as a "vulnerable patient" between November 2002 and January 2005. Data for this analysis included province-wide health insurance claims for inpatient and outpatient services delivered between November 2002 and January 2009 in Quebec. The primary analysis examined time to the first outpatient postdischarge follow-up service provided by either a primary care physician or a medical specialist. We used marginal structural models to estimate adjusted rates of follow-up with a primary care physician or with a medical specialist by primary care delivery models. RESULTS: We extracted billing data for 312 377 patients that represented 620 656 index admissions for any cause from 2002 to 2009. Rates of 30-day follow-up were 374 visits to primary care physicians and 422 visits to medical specialists per 1000 discharges. Rates of primary care physician follow-up were similar across primary care delivery models, except for patients with very high morbidity; these patients had significantly higher rates of follow-up with a primary care physician if they were enrolled in team-based primary care practices (30-d rate difference [RD] 13.3 more follow-up visits per 1000 discharges, 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.8 to 19.8). Rates of follow-up with a medical specialist were lower among patients enrolled in team-based practices, particularly within 15 days of hospital discharge (15-d RD 25.1 fewer follow-up visits per 1000 discharges, 95% CI 21.1 to 29.1). INTERPRETATION: Our study found lower rates of postdischarge follow-up with a medical specialist among older patients and patients with chronic illness who were enrolled in team-based primary care practices compared with those enrolled in traditional primary care practices. Future research is needed to better understand the role of primary health care service organization in improving acute postdischarge care.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".