MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387578020 · doi:10.12927/hcpol.2023.27178

Innovative Programs with Multi-Service Integration for Children and Youth with High Functional Health Needs

2023· article· en· W4387578020 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Émilie Dionne, Nelly D. Oelke, Shelley Doucet, Catherine M. Scott, William Montelpare, Patricia Charlton, Rima Azar, Russel Dawe, Jeannie Haggerty

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare policy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusMcGill University Health CentreMount Allison UniversityOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of Prince Edward IslandSaint John Regional HospitalUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisConversationService providerPsychologyHealth servicesPositive Youth DevelopmentContinuum of careService (business)Public relationsHealth careMedical educationApplied psychologySociologyPolitical scienceMedicineBusinessQualitative researchDevelopmental psychologyEnvironmental healthMarketingSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The integration of care services and providers across the health-social-community continuum has helped improve the lives of many children and youth living with complex health conditions.Using environmental scan data, 16 promising multi-service programs were selected and analyzed qualitatively through a deliberative conversation approach.Descriptive data of analyzed programs are presented, as well as the thematic analysis results.An important program strength is its clear founding principles and engagement of patients and families.However, the scale-up of these initiatives remains a challenge unless such programs can be better financed and supported. RésuméL'intégration des services et des fournisseurs de soins dans l' ensemble du continuum « services de santé-services sociaux-services communautaires » contribue à améliorer la vie de nombreux enfants et jeunes aux prises avec des problèmes de santé complexes.À l' aide de données d' analyse du contexte, 16 programmes multiservices prometteurs ont été sélectionnés et analysés qualitativement au moyen d' une approche de conversation délibérative.Les données descriptives des programmes analysés sont présentées ainsi que les résultats de l' analyse thématique.Une des forces importantes du programme consiste en ses principes fondateurs clairs et en l' engagement des patients et des familles.Cependant, l'intensification de ces initiatives demeurera un défi, à moins que de tels programmes puissent être mieux financés et soutenus.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare policySame topicAdolescent and Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207