MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387784590 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-072812

Pre–post analysis of the impact of British Columbia nurse practitioner primary care clinics on patient health and care experience

2023· article· en· W4387784590 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Damien Contandriopoulos, Katherine Bertoni, Arnaud Duhoux, Gurprit K. Randhawa

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversity of Victoria
FundersUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsMedicineFamily medicinePrimary careNurse practitionersNursingHealth carePrimary health carePopulationEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the impact of a primary care nurse practitioner (NP)-led clinic model piloted in British Columbia (Canada) on patients' health and care experience. DESIGN: The study relies on a quasi-experimental longitudinal design based on a pre-and-post survey of patients receiving care in NP-led clinics. The prerostering survey (T0) was focused on patients' health status and care experiences preceding being rostered to the NP clinic. One year later, patients were asked to complete a similar survey (T1) focused on the care experiences with the NP clinic. SETTING: To solve recurring problems related to poor primary care accessibility, British Columbia opened four pilot NP-led clinics in 2020. Each clinic has the equivalent of approximately six full-time NPs, four other clinicians plus support staff. Clinics are located in four cities ranging from urban to suburban. PARTICIPANTS: Recruitment was conducted by the clinic's clerical staff or by their care provider. A total of 437 usable T0 surveys and 254 matched and usable T1 surveys were collected. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The survey instrument was focused on five core dimensions of patients' primary care experience (accessibility, continuity, comprehensiveness, responsiveness and outcomes of care) as well as on the SF-12 Short-form Health Survey. RESULTS: Scores for all dimensions of patients' primary care experience increased significantly: accessibility (T0=5.9, T1=7.9, p<0.001), continuity (T0=5.5, T1=8.8, p<0.001), comprehensiveness (T0=5.6, T1=8.4, p<0.001), responsiveness (T0=7.2, T1=9.5, p<0.001), outcomes of care (T0=5.0, T1=8.3, p<0.001). SF-12 Physical health T-scores also rose significantly (T0=44.8, T1=47.6, p<0.001) but no changes we found in the mental health T scores (T0=45.8, T1=46.3 p=0.709). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the NP-led primary care model studied here likely constitutes an effective approach to improve primary care accessibility and quality.

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)0.012
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.331

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.447 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicNursing Roles and PracticesFrench-language works237,207