Record linkage studies of primary care utilisation after release from prison: A scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There is a need to improve the implementation and provision of continuity of care between prison and community in order that people who have been in prison and have a history of low engagement with services or who are vulnerable receive appropriate and timely health care and treatment. Observational studies using record linkage have investigated continuity of care after release from prison but this type of research evidence has not been synthesised. OBJECTIVE: This paper presents a protocol designed to review record linkage studies about primary care utilisation after prison release in order to inform future research and guide service organisation and delivery towards people who are at-risk following release from prison. METHODS: This scoping review will follow the framework by Arksey and O'Malley (5 stages) and guidance developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science Core Collection will be searched (January 2012-March 2023) using terms relating to (i) 'former prisoners' and (ii) 'primary care'. The review will focus on observational studies that have investigated this topic using linked data from two or more sources. Two authors will independently screen titles and abstracts (step 1) and full publications (step 2) using predefined eligibility criteria. Data will be extracted from included publications using a piloted data charting form. This review will map the findings in this research area by methodology, key findings and gaps in research, and current evidence will be synthesised narratively given the expected considerable heterogeneity across studies. DISCUSSION: This review is part of a work programme on health in prison (Administrative Data Research Centre, Northern Ireland). This work may be used to inform future research, policy and practice. Findings will be shared with stakeholders, published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences. Ethical approval is not required.
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 | 0.213 | 0.192 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.029 | 0.029 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.062 | 0.018 |
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".