Snapshot of the primary care waiting room: Informing practice redesign to align with the Patient's Medical Home model.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the demographic characteristics, health, and health care experiences of adult patients in primary care waiting rooms in Quebec, and to determine which pillars of the Patient's Medical Home (PMH) are a priority to align primary care practices with the PMH model. DESIGN: Baseline survey of a prospective cohort study using self-administered on-site and mailed questionnaires. SETTING: Twelve primary care clinics within the geographic boundaries of 4 local health care networks in metropolitan, urban, rural, and remote settings in Quebec. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1029 adult patients aged between 25 and 75 who were selected during a 1-week period in the 12 primary care clinics; 789 returned questionnaires. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients' health profiles, health behaviour patterns, reasons for the visit, and health care experiences. RESULTS: In this 2010 snapshot, 66.8% of patients waited longer than 2 weeks for their appointment, 71.0% of visits were for routine or follow-up care, and longer wait times and patient multimorbidity correlated with more reasons for the visit. After the visit, most patients reported being able to express their most important needs and that the doctor listened well; however, only 28.1% reported that the doctor had explored whether the recommendations would be realistic for them, and only 18.0% indicated that the doctor had explored the personal or family dimensions that affected their health. Among all patients, 56.9% reported having at least 3 chronic conditions (multimorbidity), and 30.3% reported having high or moderate levels of psychological distress. When describing their financial status, 30.7% of patients indicated it was "poor to squeezed or tight." Slightly more than half of patients did not have complementary private health insurance to cover costs of psychological services. CONCLUSION: In this study, the 4 priority pillars for practices to align with the PMH were timely access, team-based care, comprehensive care, and a patient-centred approach. Widespread implementation of advanced access is an urgent priority in light of persisting difficulties in timely access. Team-based and comprehensive care are needed to address the high prevalence of multimorbidity and psychological distress and to support health behaviour change. Finally, the patient-centred approach needs to underpin every care encounter.
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 | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".