A survey of Canadian adult rheumatologists’ knowledge, comfort level, and barriers in assessing psychosocial needs of young adults with rheumatic diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To assess adult rheumatologists' comfort level, current practices, and barriers to provision of optimal care in supporting young adults with pediatric-onset rheumatic conditions in Canada. Survey questions were informed by literature review, a needs assessment, and using milestones listed by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada for the entrustable professional activities (EPAs) applicable to care for rheumatology patients transitioning to adult practice. The electronic survey was distributed to adult rheumatology members of the Canadian Rheumatology Association over 4 months. Four hundred and fifty-one rheumatologists received the survey, with a response rate of 15.2%. Most respondents were from Ontario and had been in practice ≥ 10 years. Three quarters reported a lack of training in transition care although the same proportion were interested in learning more about the same. Approximately 40% felt comfortable discussing psychosocial concerns such as gender identity, sexuality, contraception, drug and alcohol use, vaping, and mental health. Despite this, 45-50% reported not discussing vaping or gender identity at all. The most frequently reported barriers to providing transition care were lack of primary care providers, allied health support, and training in caring for this age group. Most adult rheumatologists lack formal training in transition care and view it as a barrier to providing care for this unique patient population. Future educational initiatives for adult rheumatology trainees should include issues pertaining to adolescents and young adults. More research is needed to assess the effectiveness of resources such as transition navigators in ensuring a successful transition process.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".