Identifying facilitators and barriers to integrated and equitable care for community-dwelling older adults with high emergency department use from historically marginalized groups
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High rates of emergency department (ED) use by older adults persist despite attempts to improve accessibility of appropriate and comprehensive care. Understanding the drivers of ED visits from the perspective of older adults from historically marginalized groups could help reduce ED use by patients with needs that are preventable or could have been treated in a more appropriate setting. This interpretivist, feminist study aims to explore the unmet care needs of older adults (age 65 +) with high ED use and belonging to historically marginalized groups to better understand how social and structural inequities reinforced by neoliberalism; federal and provincial governance structures and policy frameworks; and regional processes and local institutional practices, shape the experiences of these older adults, particularly those at risk of poor health outcomes based on the social determinants of health (SDH). METHODS/DESIGN: This mixed methods study will employ an integrated knowledge translation (iKT) approach, starting with a quantitative phase followed by a qualitative phase. Older adults self-identifying as belonging to a historically marginalized group, having visited an ED three or more times in the past 12 months, and living in a private dwelling, will be recruited using flyers posted at two emergency care sites and by an on-site research assistant. Data obtained through surveys, short answer questions, and chart review will be used to compile case profiles of patients from historically marginalized groups with potentially avoidable ED visits. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses and inductive thematic analysis will be conducted. Findings will be interpreted using the Intersectionality-Based Policy Analysis Framework to identify the interconnections between unmet care needs, potentially avoidable ED admissions, structural inequalities, and the SDH. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted with a subset of older adults at risk of poor health outcomes based on SDH, family care partners, and health care professionals to validate preliminary findings and collect additional data on perceived facilitators and barriers to integrated and accessible care. DISCUSSION: Exploring the linkages between potentially avoidable ED visits by older adults from marginalized groups and how their care experiences have been shaped by inequities in the systems, policies, and institutions that structure health and social care provision will enable researchers to offer recommendations for equity-focused policy and clinical practice reforms to improve patient outcomes and system integration.
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".