P201 Evaluating access to inflammatory bowel disease care across Canada: Proceedings from the 2017 IBD Access Summit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic, immune-mediated disease, with Canada demonstrating the highest incidence and prevalence rates in the world. Patients with IBD often require lifelong treatment and, therefore, lifelong interactions with the healthcare system. Access to care can have a direct impact on patient health-related outcomes. Although acknowledged as a problem, the complexity of accessing IBD speciality care in Canada has not been reviewed. This lack of understanding presents a barrier in evaluating and implementing changes in IBD speciality care. The aim of the project was to identify key barriers and facilitators for and to develop a national working strategy to address limitations in access to IBD speciality care. Methods The IBD Summit was held in Toronto, Ontario in November 2017, sponsored by SPOR-CIHR catalyst funding and in partnership with Crohn’s and Colitis Canada. Perceptions and experiences of key stakeholders were gathered during two audio-recorded stakeholder dialogues held during the Summit. The audio recordings were transcribed and coded to compare and contrast between key stakeholders to determine potential differences in access to IBD care. Five final themes are highlighted in this report. Results A total of 21 key stakeholders attended, including paediatric and adult gastroenterologists, patients, researchers, and policymakers. Five key themes of importance relating to access to IBD care arose from The IBD Summit:(1) Integrated Models of Care, (2) IT Enhanced Care, (3) Health System Process, (4) Communication and Advocacy, and (5) Community Supports. The IBD Summit identified similar perceptions and experiences, highlighting common barriers and facilitators that transcend provincial borders. Shared perceptions included a need for common medical records and overall improved IT-enhanced care for managing IBD; improved centralised triage systems; increased comprehensive care support for patients and primary care physicians; and increased community supports for patients and providers. Conclusion Highlights from the IBD Summit present several clinically relevant and actionable suggestions for improved access to IBD speciality care across Canada. The suggestions provided by key stakeholders highlight the need for a system-level redesign in order to improve access to enhanced models of care. Improvements in access to IBD speciality care can only occur through partnerships between those working within the healthcare system and those within the community. Future research will involve pursuing deeper insight into the experience of patient and provider stakeholders as they navigate the healthcare system in order to access and provide 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 | 0.015 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".