Care transition strategies in Latin American countries: an integrative review
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify and analyze available literature on care transition strategies in Latin American countries. METHODS: Integrative literature review that included studies indexed in PubMed, LILACS, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL, SCOPUS databases, and the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), published in Portuguese, Spanish or English, between 2010 and 2017. RESULTS: Eleven articles were selected and the strategies were grouped into components of care transition: discharge planning, advanced care planning, patient education and promotion of self-management, medication safety, complete communication of information, and outpatient follow-up. These strategies were carried out by multidisciplinary team members, in which nurses play a leading role in promoting safe care transitions. CONCLUSIONS: Care transition activities are generally initiated very close to patient discharge, this differs from recommendations of care transition programs and models, which suggest implementing care transition strategies from the time of admission until discharge.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it