MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200035073 · doi:10.1177/20534345211068094

Comparing subspecialty and intensive care providers perspectives on pediatric complex chronic patients: A survey study

2021· article· en· W4200035073 on OpenAlexaffabout
Taylor A. Kobussen, Gregory Hansen, Tanya Holt

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Care Coordination · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubspecialtyMedicineHealth careLikert scaleChronic careFamily medicineAmbulatory careNursingAcute careChronic diseasePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Pediatric complex chronic care patients present unique challenges regarding healthcare provision: complex medical regimes, complicated family/provider dynamics, and multiple healthcare teams that can result in inconsistent care. This study examined subspecialty providers’ perspectives regarding pediatric complex chronic care patients and compared them with acute care providers while exploring opportunities to better facilitate care provided to pediatric complex chronic care patients. Methods This survey study occurring within a Canadian tertiary care pediatric center, utilized REDCap to deploy surveys involving Likert Scale and short answer questions. The Kruskal–Wallis test compared subspecialty provider perspectives when providing care to pediatric complex chronic care patients versus non-pediatric complex chronic care patients; and perspectives between subspecialty and acute care providers. Results Survey response rate was 24/46 (52.2%). Eight overarching themes emerged from Likert scale questions. Short answer questions revealed factors that may facilitate care provided to pediatric complex chronic care patients: access to funding; discharge planning; communication methods between specialists; and healthcare provider continuity. Several differences were identified when working with pediatric complex chronic care patients, compared to non-pediatric complex chronic care patients: increased time/resource burden; managing expectations of patients/families; navigating discrepancies in goals of care; complexity of coordination between services; increased efforts in coordinating discharge from hospital and working with medicalized patients/families. Discussion Exploring pediatric subspecialty provider perspectives of pediatric complex chronic care patients revealed opportunities to enhance care provided: increased resources to ease the strain of care provision for parents, implementation of a discharge coordinator, complex care clinics with a pediatrician to “quarterback” care, and co-management between the complex care pediatrician and acute care physician when admitted to an acute care service. Implementation of these initiatives may improve the care provided to pediatric complex chronic care patients.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Care CoordinationSame topicAdolescent and Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207