Transitional Care for Young People with Neurological Disorders: A Scoping Review with A Focus on Patients with Movement Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Childhood-onset movement disorders represent a heterogenous group of conditions. Given the complexity of these disorders, the transition of care from pediatric to adult medicine is an important consideration. We performed a scoping review of the literature on transitional care in chronic neurological disease, exploring key transitional issues and proposed transitional care models. Our aim was to describe the current knowledge and gaps about the transition process of young adults with chronic neurological disorders, paying special attention to childhood onset movement disorders. A total of 64 articles were included in the qualitative synthesis; 56 articles reported on transitional care issues, and 8 articles reported on transitional care models. Only 2 articles included patients with movement disorders. The following 4 main transitional issues were identified following synthesis of the available literature: (1) inadequate preparation for the transition process, (2) inappropriate and inconsistent transition practices, (3) inadequate adult services, and (4) heightened emotional response surrounding transition. Of the reported transitional care models, multidisciplinary ambulatory care was the most common approach. In studies evaluating patient-related outcomes, positive health, educational, and vocational outcomes were found. The available literature provides insights on issues that can arise during transition that should be addressed to improve patient and caregiver comfort and satisfaction with care. Further research is needed to evaluate how transitional care programs affect outcomes and their cost effectiveness. More studies are required to determine the needs and outcomes specific to patients with childhood onset movement disorders. © 2020 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
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 | 0.006 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".