Patient-directed Digital Health Technologies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Continuity of care (COC) measurements that reflect relational continuity have been used as quality indicators, yet their applicability near the end of life may be limited. Modified continuity indices—UPC-Team (Usual Provider of Care) and BB-Team (Bice-Boxerman)—were developed to reflect escalating care needs and capture associations with patient-centered outcomes. Objectives: To measure associations between the modified COC indices, UPC-Team, and BB-Team during the last year of life and end-of-life (EOL) health care outcomes. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of adults who died between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2022, with advanced chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and/or heart failure prevalent ≥2 years before death, using health administrative data from Ontario, Canada. Multivariate regressions measured associations between the indices and days spent in community during the last 30 and 14 days of life, and place of death. Results: Among 175,323 included individuals (median age at death=80; 55.4% male), the median number of community days was 23 and 10 in the last 30 and 14 days of life; 56.5% died in a health care institution. Higher UPC-Team and BB-Team scores were associated with increased odds of institutional deaths and fewer community days. Conclusions: Higher continuity scores were associated with increased odds of institutional death and fewer days spent in the community, suggesting limited utility of these modified indices in predicting favorable EOL health care outcomes. Findings highlight the need for future research to incorporate all aspects of continuity (ie, relational, informational, and management) to better capture care coordination in this context.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".