MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4291818823 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-060430

Linkages between health systems and communities for chronic care: a scoping review protocol

2022· review· en· W4291818823 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole George, Dennis Radman, Hervé Tchala Vignon Zomahoun, Antoine Boivin, Sara Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de MontréalMcGill University Health CentreCentre de réadaptation Lethbridge-Layton-MackayCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProtocol (science)Health careHealth services researchPublic healthAlternative medicineGerontologyFamily medicineNursingPathologyEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Linkages between health systems and communities may leverage community assets to address unmet needs and provide services for improved continuity and coordination of care. However, there are limited examples of specific strategies for such linkages for chronic disease management. Guided by a local need from stakeholders, this scoping review aims to clarify and map methods and strategies for linkages between communities and health systems across chronic diseases, to inform future implementation efforts. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The scoping review will be conducted following Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework and latest Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines, with continuous stakeholder engagement throughout. A structured literature search of records from January 2001 to April 2022 will be completed in MEDLINE/PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, in addition to grey literature. Two reviewers will independently complete study selection following inclusion criteria reflecting population (chronic disease), concept (integrated care) and context (health systems and communities) and will chart the data. Data will be analysed using descriptive qualitative and quantitative methods, to map and operationalise the linkages between health systems and communities. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The scoping review does not require ethics approval as it will examine and collect data from publicly available materials, and all stakeholder engagement will follow guidelines for patient and public involvement. Findings will be reported through a summarising list of considerations for different linkage strategies between health systems and community resources and implications for future research, practice and policy will be discussed and presented. The results will also be used to inform an integrated knowledge translation project to implement community-health system linkages to support chronic pain management. REGISTRATION NUMBER: 10.17605/OSF.IO/UTSN9.

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)0.188
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.126
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.188
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1880.126
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.011
Bibliometrics0.0260.024
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0110.013
Open science0.0090.010
Research integrity0.0110.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0740.019

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 head0.425
GPT teacher head0.587
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicDiabetes Management and Education→French-language works237,207→