MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130550224 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045596

How digital health solutions align with the roles and functions that support hospital to home transitions for older adults: a rapid review study protocol

2021· review· en· W3130550224 on OpenAlexafffund
Hardeep Singh, Alana Armas, Susan Law, Terence Tang, Carolyn Steele Gray, Heather Cunningham, Rachel Thombs, Moriah Ellen, Jasvinei Sritharan, Jason X Nie, Donna Plett, Carlotta Micaela Jarach, Kednapa Thavorn, Michelle Nelson

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of OttawaTrillium Health CentrePublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoSinai Health SystemLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCINAHLMedicinePsychological interventionDigital healthHealth careNursingProtocol (science)MEDLINEIntervention (counseling)GerontologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Older adults may experience challenges during the hospital to home transitions that could be mitigated by digital health solutions. However, to promote adoption in practice and realise benefits, there is a need to specify how digital health solutions contribute to hospital to home transitions, particularly pertinent in this era of social distancing. This rapid review will: (1) elucidate the various roles and functions that have been developed to support hospital to home transitions of care, (2) identify existing digital health solutions that support hospital to home transitions of care, (3) identify gaps and new opportunities where digital health solutions can support these roles and functions and (4) create recommendations that will inform the design and structure of future digital health interventions that support hospital to home transitions for older adults (eg, the pre-trial results of the Digital Bridge intervention; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04287192). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A two-phase rapid review will be conducted to meet identified aims. In phase 1, a selective literature review will be used to generate a conceptual map of the roles and functions of individuals that support hospital to home transitions for older adults. In phase 2, a search on MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL will identify literature on digital health solutions that support hospital to home transitions. The ways in which digital health solutions can support the roles and functions that facilitate these transitions will then be mapped in the analysis and generation of findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol is a review of the literature and does not involve human subjects, and therefore, does not require ethics approval. This review will permit the identification of gaps and new opportunities for digital processes and platforms that enable care transitions and can help inform the design and implementation of future digital health interventions. Review findings will be disseminated through publications and presentations to key stakeholders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.162
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.171
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.855

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1620.171
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.013
Bibliometrics0.0170.015
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0090.011
Open science0.0070.006
Research integrity0.0080.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0660.014

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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.336 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207