MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387878891 · doi:10.1108/jica-04-2023-0024

Integrated care for older persons who live with complex health and social care requirements: a core set of indicators

2023· article· en· W4387878891 on OpenAlex
Jeanette Prorok, Kelly Kay, Adam Morrison, Salinda Horgan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Integrated Care · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDelphi Technique in Research
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelphi methodIntegrated careHealth careRanking (information retrieval)Set (abstract data type)Quality (philosophy)MedicineProcess managementBusinessPsychologyNursingComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Performance measures are an important mediating mechanism that influences the design and delivery of care. Unfortunately, it is still commonly the case that acute care indicators are employed to assess the efficacy of integrated care. This hinders the ability to accurately assess and continuously improve integrated care efforts for priority populations, including older persons who live with complex health and social care requirements. A core set of indicators is needed from which to assess the quality and impact of integrated care on these older persons and care partners. Design/methodology/approach A modified Delphi process was employed that comprised of the following steps: (1) selection of an indicator inventory (2) defining criteria for ranking and achieving consensus, (3) recruiting participants, (4) iterative voting rounds and analysis and (5) selection of a core indicator set. Findings The study produced a core set of 16 indicators of integrated care that pertain to older persons who live with health and social care requirements. The set can be applied by health and social care organizations and systems to assess the quality and impact of integrated care for this population across the continuum of care. Research limitations/implications Although the gap in the availability of relevant indicators was the impetus for the study, this also meant there was a dearth of validated indicators to draw from. There are significant gaps in commonly used data sets with respect to indicators of integrated care as it relates to older persons and care partner. Practical implications The indicator set is intended to follow the older person and care partner throughout their health journey, enabling a whole systems view of their care. The set can be used in full or in part by health and social care systems and organizations across various primary, acute, rehabilitative and community settings for program development and evaluation purposes. Social implications The core set of indicators that emerged out of this study is a first step toward ensuring that older persons who live with complex health and social care requirements and their care partners receive quality integrated care across the continuum of care. Originality/value The findings are informed by the perspectives of older persons, care partners and healthcare professionals. Future research is needed to test, validate and potentially expand the indicator set.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.689

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.300 · 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