MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3210779833 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055194

Quality indicators for transition from paediatric to adult care for adolescents with chronic physical and mental illness: protocol for a systematic review

2021· review· en· W3210779833 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Katherine Bailey, Stephanie J. Lee, Thomas de Los Reyes, Lisha Lo, Jan Willem Gorter, Alène Toulany

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersHospital for Sick Children
KeywordsMedicineProtocol (science)Mental illnessQuality (philosophy)Mental healthPsychiatryFamily medicineGerontologyAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Transition from paediatric to adult care is a complex process, which poses significant challenges for adolescents with chronic physical and mental illnesses. For many, transfer to adult care is associated with poor health and psychosocial outcomes. Quality indicators to evaluate transition to adult care are needed to benchmark and compare performance across conditions and health systems. This systematic review aims to identify quality indicators for successful transition to adult care which can be applied across chronic physical and/or mental illnesses. METHODS: Published literature will be searched using MEDLINE, Embase and CINHAL from earliest available date to July 2021. Grey literature will be searched using the Grey Matters tool. Using a set of inclusion/exclusion criteria, two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts, followed by full-text review. Disagreements will be resolved by a third reviewer. Study selection and data extraction will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols. Study appraisal will be completed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation for Quality Indicators instrument. Extracted quality indicators will be categorised into a conceptual framework. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Results from this review will offer novel insights into quality indicators that may be used to measure and evaluate transition success across conditions, which will be disseminated via a Canadian transition collaborative, workshops and peer-reviewed publication. Extracted quality indicators will be further prioritised in a Delphi study with patients, caregivers and providers. This is a critical step in developing a core set of metrics to evaluate transitions to adult care. Ethics approval is not required as this review will identify and synthesise findings from published literature. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020198030.

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)0.107
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.143
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.566

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1070.143
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.023
Bibliometrics0.0170.018
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0100.010
Open science0.0060.007
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0680.010

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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.577
Teacher spread0.406 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicAdolescent and Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207