MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2941666439

Implementation of Health Links coordinated care plans for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities: Cross-sectoral pilot program.

2019· article· en· W2941666439 on OpenAlexaff
Mary Martin, Elizabeth Grier, Nicole Bobbette, Ian Casson, Janet Durbin, Meg Gemmill, Yona Lunsky, Hélène Ouellette‐Kuntz

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDown syndrome and intellectual disability research
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careAmbulatory careMedicinePopulationGerontologyNursingEnvironmental health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PROBLEM ADDRESSED: Adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) are a complex population that could benefit from improved care coordination across health and social sectors, as they experience poorer health and have higher rates of emergency department use and hospitalization due to ambulatory care-sensitive conditions. OBJECTIVE OF PROGRAM: To pilot a novel, enhanced model of care coordination for complex patients with IDD. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Health Links is a provincial care-coordination program for patients with complex health care needs. This pilot program adapted Health Links to include a guide and training specific to adults with IDD to ensure that these patients' needs were met and high-quality, efficient care was provided. CONCLUSION: A tailored care-coordination approach for adults with IDD was able to identify complex patients in need and successfully bridge cross-sectoral 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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.167

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.300 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicDown syndrome and intellectual disability researchFrench-language works237,207