MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312181715 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051314

Improving the transition from paediatric to adult healthcare: a scoping review on the recommendations of young adults with lived experience

2022· review· en· W4312181715 on OpenAlexaff
Monique Cassidy, Shelley Doucet, Alison Luke, Alex Goudreau, Lillian MacNeill

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLMedicineGrey literaturePsycINFOMEDLINEHealth carePreparednessInclusion (mineral)Family medicineNursingSystematic reviewGerontologyPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this review was to identify recommendations within the literature on how to improve the transition from paediatric to adult healthcare from the perspective of young adults (YAs) living with chronic conditions who have gone through the process. DESIGN: This review was conducted in accordance with JBI methodology for scoping reviews. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), PsycINFO (EBSCO) and EMBASE (Elsevier) databases, and conducted a grey literature search for relevant material. The databases were searched in December 2019, and re-searched June 2020 and September 2020, while the grey literature was searched in April 2020. This scoping review focused on the recommendations of YAs with chronic conditions who have transitioned from paediatric to adult healthcare, in any setting (eg, hospital, clinic or community), and across all sectors (eg, health, education and social services). RESULTS: Eighteen studies met inclusion criteria for this review. These studies included YAs with 14 different chronic conditions, receiving primary health services in North America (67%) and Europe (33%). YAs' recommendations for improving the transition from paediatric to adult healthcare (n=number of studies reported) included: improving continuity of care (n=12); facilitating patient-centred care (n=9); building strong support networks (n=11) and implementing transition education preparedness training (n=7). CONCLUSION: Review findings can benefit service delivery by addressing important barriers to health, education, and social services for youth transitioning to adult healthcare.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.721
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.341
GPT teacher head0.542
Teacher spread0.200 · 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.

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

Citations34
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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