MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793000807 · doi:10.1111/1747-0080.12406

Rationale and developmental methodology for the SIMPLE approach: A Systematised, Interdisciplinary Malnutrition Pathway for impLementation and Evaluation in hospitals

2018· article· en· W2793000807 on OpenAlexaff
Jack Bell, Adrienne Young, J. Hill, Merrilyn Banks, Tracy Comans, Rhiannon Barnes, Heather Keller

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrition & Dietetics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsResearch Institute for AgingUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMalnutritionHealth careMedicineNursingMedical educationPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: Changing population demographics, service demands, and healthcare provider expectations suggest that a shift is required regarding how malnutrition care is managed in hospitals. The present study aims to build the reason for required change, and to describe the process used to develop a model for managing malnutrition for implementation across six Queensland hospitals. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of approaches to managing malnutrition in Queensland public hospitals, and development of a new model of care (guided by Knowledge-to-Action Framework and qualitative interviews) for testing within a broader implementation program. RESULTS: Twenty-three surveys were distributed with 21 completed by metropolitan (n = 11), regional (n = 8), and rural/remote (n = 2) settings. Substantial within and across site variance was observed, with care processes focused towards highly individualised, dietitian delivered care. Some early adopter sites demonstrated systematic, interdisciplinary or delegated malnutrition care processes; however, the latter was rarely or never undertaken in eight sites. A model for the Systematised, Interdisciplinary Malnutrition Pathway for impLementation and Evaluation (SIMPLE) in hospitals was drafted based on identified contemporary models and supporting literature. A mixed-methods approach combined survey data with structured interviews conducted in six sites, purposively sampled for maximal variation to iteratively refine the model. Consensus for implementation of the final model was achieved across site clinicians, leaders, and governance structures. CONCLUSIONS: Systematised, delegated, and interdisciplinary nutrition care activities are realistic in at least some settings. A model is now available to provide interdisciplinary care. Next steps including testing implementation will determine if this interdisciplinary model improves malnutrition care delivered in hospitals.

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)0.277
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.202
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.277
Threshold uncertainty score0.892

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2770.202
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.020
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0070.014
Research integrity0.0090.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.188
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.266 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations48
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrition & DieteticsSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207