Patient-centered care in musculoskeletal practice: Key elements to support clinicians to focus on the person
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
Musculoskeletal rehabilitation, including physiotherapy, needs to move towards a broader biopsychosocial understanding of musculoskeletal conditions and the delivery of high-value care for people with persistent pain conditions, in which a patient-centered approach is a key feature. However, it has been reported that clinicians experience difficulties with integrating patient-centered care principles into their clinical practice. Based on a focused symposium about patient-centered care for patients with musculoskeletal conditions, held during the online 2021 World Physiotherapy Congress, the purpose of this article is to share key elements of the content of this symposium with a wider audience, aimed at enabling clinicians to enhance patient-centeredness in their current practice. These key elements include establishing meaningful connections, deciding together and self-management support. Moreover, challenges on patient-centered care in low/middle income countries will be discussed and recommendations to implement patient-centered care in clinical practice will be provided.
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 | 0.004 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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