MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213204989 · doi:10.1111/cch.12984

Programmes to support paediatric to adult healthcare transitions for youth with complex care needs and their families: A scoping review

2022· review· en· W4213204989 on OpenAlexafffund
Shelley Doucet, Jennifer Splane, Alison Luke, Kathryn Asher, Sydney Breneol, J. Pidduck, Amy Grant, Émilie Dionne, Cathie Scott, Lisa Keeping‐Burke, Jessie‐Lee D. McIsaac, Jan Willem Gorter, Janet Curran

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Care Health and Development · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of CalgaryMcGill UniversityMount Saint Vincent UniversityNova Scotia Health AuthorityIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreUniversity of New BrunswickDalhousie UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCINAHLPsycINFOPsychological interventionHealth careSocial supportMEDLINENursingPsychologyMedicinePolitical scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: An increasing number of children have complex care needs (CCN) that impact their health and cause limitations in their lives. More of these youth are transitioning from paediatric to adult healthcare due to complex conditions being increasingly associated with survival into adulthood. Typically, the transition process is plagued by barriers, which can lead to adverse health consequences. There is an increased need for transitional care interventions when moving from paediatric to adult healthcare. To date, literature associated with this process for youth with CCN and their families has not been systematically examined. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this scoping review is to map the range of programmes in the literature that support youth with CCN and their families as they transition from paediatric to adult healthcare. METHODS: The review was conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute's methodology for scoping reviews. A search, last run in April 2021, located published articles in PubMed, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycINFO and Social Work Abstracts databases. RESULTS: The search yielded 1523 citations, of which 47 articles met the eligibility criteria. A summary of the article characteristics, programme characteristics and programme barriers and enablers is provided. Overall, articles reported on a variety of programmes that focused on supporting youth with various conditions, beginning in the early or late teenage years. Financial support and lack of training for care providers were the most common transition program barriers, whereas a dedicated transition coordinator, collaborative care, transition tools and interpersonal support were the most common enablers. The most common patient-level outcome reported was satisfaction. DISCUSSION: This review consolidates available information about interventions designed to support youth with CCN transitioning from paediatric to adult healthcare. The results will help to inform further research, as well as transition policy and practice advancement.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.069
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.069
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0160.016
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.282 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations32
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild Care Health and DevelopmentSame topicAdolescent and Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207