MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048992406 · doi:10.1186/s13063-020-04600-y

Health TAPESTRY Ontario: protocol for a randomized controlled trial to test reproducibility and implementation

2020· article· en· W3048992406 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Dee Mangin, Larkin Lamarche, Doug Oliver, Sivan Bomze, Sayem Borhan, Tracy Browne, Tracey Carr, Julie Datta, Lisa Dolovich, Michelle Howard, Sarah Marentette‐Brown, Cathy Risdon, Samina Talat, Jean‐Éric Tarride, Lehana Thabane, Ruta Valaitis, David Price

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsCanadian Red Cross SocietyMcMaster UniversityImpactHealth Sciences CentreMcMaster University Medical Centre
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareStrongMcMaster University
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialGeneralizability theoryMedicineHealth careProtocol (science)Intervention (counseling)NursingTest (biology)Family medicineGerontologyAlternative medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Health TAPESTRY (Health Teams Advancing Patient Experience: STRengthening qualitY) aims to help people stay healthier for longer where they live by providing person-focused care through the integration of four key program components: (1) trained volunteers who visit clients in their homes, (2) an interprofessional primary health care team, (3) use of technology to collect and share information, and (4) improved connections to community health and social services. The initial randomized controlled trial of Health TAPESTRY found promising results in terms of health care use and patient outcomes, indicating a shift from reactive to preventive care. The trial was based on one clinical academic center, thus limiting generalizability. The study objectives are (1) to test reproducibility of the established effectiveness of Health TAPESTRY on physical activity and hospitalizations, (2) to test the feasibility of, and understand the contributing factors to, the implementation of Health TAPESTRY in six diverse communities across Ontario, Canada, and (3) to determine the value for money of implementing Health TAPESTRY. METHODS: This planned study is a pragmatic parallel randomized controlled trial with a delayed intervention for control participants at 6 months. This trial will simultaneously assess effectiveness and implementation in a real-world setting (type II hybrid) in six diverse communities across Ontario. Participants 70 years of age and older will be randomized into the Health TAPESTRY intervention or the control group (usual care). Intervention clients will receive an individualized plan of care from an interprofessional care team. The plan will be based on a client's goals and current health risks identified through volunteer visits. The study's outcomes are mapped onto the RE-AIM framework, with levels of physical activity and number of hospitalizations as the co-primary outcomes. The main analysis will be a comparison at 6 months. DISCUSSION: It is important to evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of Health TAPESTRY in multiple communities prior to scaling or widespread adoption. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03397836 . Registered on 12 January 2018.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.116
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.190
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1160.190
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.751
GPT teacher head0.735
Teacher spread0.016 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrialsSame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207