Providing person-centred care for people with multiple chronic conditions: protocol for a qualitative study incorporating client and staff perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Chronic conditions are associated with over one-third of potentially avoidable hospitalisations. Integrated care programmes aim to help people with chronic conditions to self-manage their health, thus avoiding hospital admissions. While founded on principles of person-centred care, the experiences of people with multiple chronic conditions in integrated care programmes are not widely known. Our study will explore how person-centred care is incorporated into an integrated care programme for people with multiple chronic conditions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a qualitative phenomenological study being conducted from March 2018 to June 2019, in a large metropolitan health service in Melbourne, Australia. Participants will be programme clients (and/or their carers) and staff working in the programme. We will interview staff about their experiences of the programme. Recruited staff will assist with recruitment of clients who recently completed an episode of care, to participate in a semistructured interview in their home. We will also analyse the medical records of interviewed clients, and observe outpatient clinics connected to the programme, based on the findings of the interviews. We will analyse all data using thematic analysis, with overarching themes representing staff and client perspectives of person-centred care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was granted by Monash Health (HREC/18/MonH/33) and Monash University (12260) Human Research Ethics Committees. Our study will provide a comprehensive exploration of person-centred care in an integrated care programme. It will add information to person-centred care literature on participants' perceptions of what works and why, including barriers and enablers to person-centred care in a complex environment. Findings of this study will be disseminated via publications, conferences and presentations to the health service participants.
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 | 0.111 | 0.066 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.050 | 0.010 |
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".