Patient-centered care pathways: what does it mean? An integrative conceptual framework to meet the need of an international consensus: a qualitative systematic review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Faced with increased expectations regarding the quality and safety of health care delivery systems, a number of stakeholders are increasingly looking for more qualitative and efficient ways to deliver care. This study is conducted to provide a clear definition of the patient-centered care pathway and its characteristics to meet the need for an international consensus. Methods: This qualitative systematic review aims to perform a systematic synthesis of published evidence concerning (1) the definition of the patient trajectory, patient pathway or patient journey and (2) their characteristics. With a consulting librarian, a comprehensive and systematic search in three databases was conducted (PUBMED, Embase, ABI/Inform), from 1995 to 2020 without language criteria. Eligibility criteria guiding data selection will follow the PICo mnemonic criteria consisting of (1) Population : all types of patients managed by health care delivery systems for an acute or chronic condition regardless of age or condition, (2) Phenomena : studies that contribute to the definition and conceptualization of the concepts of care trajectory, care pathway and patient journey resulting in a theoretical and conceptual contribution, and (3) Context : health care providers include all providers of primary, secondary, tertiary, and quaternary care in any geographic area. Two reviewers will independently screen, select, extract data and make a critical assessment of the methodology used with the JBI Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument (JBI QARI).Discussion: This systematic review will provide much-needed knowledge regarding patient-centered pathways. The results will benefit clinicians, decision makers, and researchers by giving them a clear and integrated definition and understanding of the patient-centered care pathways and their characteristics to finally meet the need for an international consensus.
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 | 0.268 | 0.194 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.020 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.005 |
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".