An exploration of Canadian transitional care programs for older adults
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transitional care programs are effective for improving patient outcomes upon discharge from acute care services and reducing the burden of healthcare costs; however, little is known about the types of transitional care programs for older adults across Canada. This exploratory study gathered an in-depth understanding of Canadian transitional care programs and described how each program functions to support older adults and family/friend caregivers. Nine key informants were interviewed about the development of transitional care programs within four Canadian provincial regions including Atlantic, Central, Prairie, and West Coast. Key facilitators and barriers influencing the development and long-term success of transitional care programs included program scope, program structure, continuity of care, funding, and health system infrastructure. Future research is required to identify how a broad range of transitional care programs operate and to disseminate knowledge with health leaders and decision-makers to ensure transitional care programs are embedded as essential health system services.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it