Information and Communications Technologies Enabling Integrated Primary Care for Patients With Complex Care Needs: Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Information and communications technologies (ICTs) are recognized as critical enablers of integrated primary care to support patients with multiple chronic conditions. Although ICT-enabled integrated primary care holds promise in supporting patients with complex care needs through team-based and continued care, critical implementation factors regarding what ICTs are available and how they enable this model are yet to be mapped in the literature. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review addressed the current knowledge gap by answering the following research question: What ICTs are used in delivering integrated primary care to patients with complex care needs? METHODS: The Arksey and O'Malley method enhanced by the work by Levac et al was used to guide this scoping review. In total, 4 electronic medical databases were accessed-MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO-collecting studies published between January 2000 and December 2021. Identified peer-reviewed articles were screened. Relevant studies were charted, collated, and analyzed using the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care and the eHealth Enhanced Chronic Care Model. RESULTS: A total of 52,216 articles were identified, of which 31 (0.06%) met the review's eligibility criteria. In the current literature, ICTs are used to serve the following functions in the integrated primary care setting: information sharing, self-management support, clinical decision-making, and remote service delivery. Integration efforts are supported by ICTs by promoting teamwork and coordinating clinical services across teams and organizations. Patient, provider, organizational, and technological implementation factors are considered important for ICT-based interventions in the integrated primary care setting. CONCLUSIONS: ICTs play a critical role in enabling clinical and professional integration in the primary care setting to meet the health system-related needs of patients with complex care needs. Future research is needed to explore how to integrate technologies at an organizational and system level to create a health system that is well prepared to optimize technologies to support patients with complex care needs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.026 | 0.029 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".