Specialized Care without the Subspecialist: A Value Opportunity for Secondary Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An underutilized value strategy that may reduce unnecessary subspecialty involvement in pediatric healthcare targets the high-quality care of children with common chronic conditions such as obesity, asthma, or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder within primary care settings. In this commentary, we propose that "secondary care", defined as specialized visits delivered by primary care providers, a general pediatrician, or other primary care providers, can obtain the knowledge, skill and, over time, the experience to manage one or more of these common chronic conditions by creating clinical time and space to provide condition-focused care. This care model promotes familiarity, comfort, proximity to home, and leverages the provider's expertise and connections with community-based resources. Evidence is provided to prove that, with multi-disciplinary and subspecialist support, this model of care can improve the quality, decrease the costs, and improve the provider's satisfaction with 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.021 | 0.021 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".