MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4375955064 · doi:10.1186/s12913-023-09424-5

Effectiveness of system navigation programs linking primary care with community-based health and social services: a systematic review

2023· review· en· W4375955064 on OpenAlexafffund
Kylie Teggart, Sarah Neil‐Sztramko, Abbira Nadarajah, Amy Wang, Caroline M. Moore, Nancy Carter, Janet S. Adams, Kamal Jain, Penelope Petrie, Aref Alshaikhahmed, Shreya Yugendranag, Rebecca Ganann

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Health Services Research · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaImpactMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMcMaster University
KeywordsCINAHLMedicineHealth informaticsHealth careHealth administrationNursingMEDLINENursing researchPublic healthPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Fragmented delivery of health and social services can impact access to high-quality, person-centred care. The goal of system navigation is to reduce barriers to healthcare access and improve the quality of care. However, the effectiveness of system navigation remains largely unknown. This systematic review aims to identify the effectiveness of system navigation programs linking primary care with community-based health and social services to improve patient, caregiver, and health system outcomes. METHODS: Building on a previous scoping review, PsychInfo, EMBASE, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Clinical Trials Registry were searched for intervention studies published between January 2013 and August 2020. Eligible studies included system navigation or social prescription programs for adults, based in primary care settings. Two independent reviewers completed study selection, critical appraisal, and data extraction. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were included; studies had generally low to moderate risk of bias. System navigation models were lay person-led (n = 10), health professional-led (n = 4), team-based (n = 6), or self-navigation with lay support as needed (n = 1). Evidence from three studies (low risk of bias) suggests that team-based system navigation may result in slightly more appropriate health service utilization compared to baseline or usual care. Evidence from four studies (moderate risk of bias) suggests that either lay person-led or health professional-led system navigation models may improve patient experiences with quality of care compared to usual care. It is unclear whether system navigation models may improve patient-related outcomes (e.g., health-related quality of life, health behaviours). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of system navigation programs on caregiver, cost-related, or social care outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There is variation in findings across system navigation models linking primary care with community-based health and social services. Team-based system navigation may result in slight improvements in health service utilization. Further research is needed to determine the effects on caregiver and cost-related outcomes.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
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 score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.168
GPT teacher head0.562
Teacher spread0.394 · 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

Citations42
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Health Services ResearchSame topicInterprofessional Education and CollaborationFrench-language works237,207