MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3147009272 · doi:10.1177/20543581211003744

Kidney Check Point-of-Care Testing—Furthering Patient Engagement and Patient-Centered Care in Canada’s Rural and Remote Indigenous Communities: Program Report

2021· article· en· W3147009272 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sarah A. Curtis, Heather Martin, Michelle S. DiNella, Barry Lavallee, Caroline Chartrand, Lorraine McLeod, Cathy Woods, Allison Dart, Navdeep Tangri, Claudio Rigatto, Paul Komenda

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and Disease · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaChildren's Hospital Research Institute of ManitobaDiabetes CanadaFirst Nations Health and Social Secretariat of ManitobaSeven Oaks General Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIndigenousMedicineReferralHealth careNursingFamily medicineEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF PROGRAM: Access to health care services remains a significant barrier for many Indigenous people's living in rural and remote regions of Canada. Driven by geographical isolation and compounded by socioeconomic and environmental disparities, individuals living under these circumstances face disproportionately poor health outcomes. Kidney Check is a comprehensive screening, triage, and treatment initiative working to bring culturally safe preventive care to rural and remote Indigenous communities across Manitoba, Ontario, BC, Alberta, and Saskatchewan. The project's patient-oriented approach addresses concerns raised by kidney patients and their caregivers using culturally safe practices. Using the various expertise of their multidisciplinary team, Kidney Check seeks to further collaborative efforts to improve access to preventive health care for these groups. Meaningful engagement with patients, communities, and local health care stakeholders ensures Indigenous voices are heard and incorporated into the project in a way that promotes shared decision-making and sustainability. SOURCES OF INFORMATION: As an affiliate program of the Can-SOLVE CKD Network, Kidney Check's guiding priorities were developed over 3 years of patient consultation and finalized during 2 workshops held with more than 30 patients, caregivers, Indigenous peoples, researchers, and policy makers using a modified Delphi process. Today, patients continue to participate in project development via 2 governing bodies: The Patient Governance Circle and the Indigenous Peoples Engagement and Research Council (IPERC). METHODS: Modeled after the Indigenous-led 2015 FINISHED project in Manitoba, Kidney Check employs point-of-care testing to identify diabetes, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease (CKD) in individuals, ages 10 and above, regardless of pre-existing risk factors. The Kidney Check team consists of 4 working groups: project leadership, provincial management, local community partners, and patient partners. By using and building on existing relationships between local and provincial health care stakeholders and various Indigenous communities, the program furthers collaborative efforts to bridge gaps in health equity. KEY FINDINGS: The Kidney Check program has established an infrastructure that integrates patient engagement at all stages of the program from priority setting to deployment and dissemination strategies. LIMITATIONS: While we encourage and offer screening services to all, many still choose not to attend for a variety of reasons which may introduce selection bias. Kidney Check uses patient engagement as a foundational component of the program; however, there is currently a limited amount of research documenting the benefits of patient engagement in health care settings. More formal qualitative evaluations of these activities are needed. In addition, as the COVID-19 pandemic has halted screening procedures in most communities, we currently do not have quantitative data to support the efficacy of the Kidney Check program. IMPLICATIONS: For many Indigenous people, lack of accessibility to health care services is compounded by sociopolitical barriers that disrupt relationships between patients and providers. Meaningful engagement presents one opportunity to ensure the voices and perspectives of Indigenous patients and communities are incorporated into health services. In addition, this screening paradigm has shown to be cost effective as shown by analyses done on the FINISHED screening program.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.516

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Kidney Health and DiseaseSame topicChronic Kidney Disease and DiabetesFrench-language works237,207