MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388725475 · doi:10.1370/afm.22.s1.5290

Using participatory research to develop inter-sectorial collaboration between primary care teams and community organizations

2023· article· en· W4388725475 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Géraldine Layani, Brigitte Vachon, Isabel Rodrigues, Arnaud Duhoux, Janusz Kaczorowski, Claire Gosselin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentParticipatory action researchGeneral partnershipPublic relationsAgency (philosophy)Health careNursingCommunity-based participatory researchMedical educationMedicineKnowledge managementBusinessPolitical scienceSociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Diabetes is a global public health problem. In 2022, the Public Health Agency of Canada published a framework to improve diabetes care. A key recommendation was collaborative action from diverse sectors Objective: To describe 1) the process of implementing an innovative community care pathway through intersectoral collaboration to improve the empowerment of people with diabetes and 2) the perception of stakeholders involved in implementing this pathway. Type of study: Participatory research. Location: two family medicine groups (FMGs) of an integrated health and social services center (CISSS) located on the outskirts of Montreal (Canada). Participants: patient partners, professionals from two FMGs and the diabetes center, managers, community organizers, head of a community organization and researchers. Intervention: 1) Co-creation and implementation of an innovative community care pathway to support the empowerment of people living with diabetes; 2) Evaluation of the perception of the partners involved to identify their acceptability of this intervention. Main evaluation parameters: A central committee and several subcommittees involving participants were created and met regularly for 12 months. Meetings were recorded, and field notes were taken to document the participatory research process. 12 Individual interviews were conducted with core committee members to assess their perceptions. Qualitative data analysis was conducted deductively using NVIVO and Bilodeau’s framework. Results: The activation of partnership links was facilitated by the creation of tools to refer patients from the clinical setting to the community setting and to support the empowerment of people living with diabetes. The design of new partnership links between the clinical departments and the community was facilitated by the holding of several regular formal and informal meetings organized by the project team, by the presence of a project coordinator who facilitated links between the players, by the improvement of communication between the players, by the use of a common language, by the presence of the patient partners at all stages of the project, which made the meetings more relevant, and by a common understanding of diabetes Conclusion: Intersectoral collaboration optimizes implementing an innovative approach to care that focuses on the person-centred needs and the determinants of health. A structured process and favourable conditions are needed to operationalize it

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)0.249
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.139
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.249
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2490.139
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0160.019
Scholarly communication0.0120.011
Open science0.0040.024
Research integrity0.0040.005
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 head0.864
GPT teacher head0.736
Teacher spread0.128 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHealth Policy Implementation Science→French-language works237,207→