MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392172506 · doi:10.1177/20552076241232949

Patients’ and caregivers’ experiences of virtual care in a primary care setting during the COVID-19 pandemic: A patient-oriented research study

2024· article· en· W4392172506 on OpenAlex
Gayle Halas, Alanna Baldwin, Kerri MacKay, Ernesto Cárdenas, Lisa LaBine, Phyllis Cherrett, Linda Abraham, Vivianne Fogarty, Alexander Singer, Alan Katz, Sarah Kirby

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsGeorge & Fay Yee Centre for Healthcare InnovationUniversity of Manitoba
FundersResearch Manitoba
KeywordsPhoneQuality (philosophy)NursingHealth careConversationPsychologyFocus groupPerceptionVirtual patientVideoconferencingMedical educationMedicineMultimediaComputer scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: This study explored patient and caregiver expectations and experiences of virtual primary care in Manitoba, Canada. This study focused on accessibility of care, acceptability and perceptions of quality from 'users' of primary healthcare services. Due to the rapid implementation of virtual primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada, patient/public input was largely bypassed. Methods: A mixed method was conducted in collaboration with Patient and Caregiver Community Advisors. Data was obtained from 696 surveys and 9 focus groups (n = 41 patients and caregivers). Results: Data suggest good acceptance of virtual visits, although considered a new experience despite almost exclusive use of the telephone. Participants preferred more input for choosing the type of visit but experienced less stress, time and inconvenience by using virtual care. There were mixed opinions of quality. More complex visits were associated with incomplete consultations and serve as one exemplar of the limitations due to lack of physical presence or contact. Unique communication skills were required to convey health concerns adequately and accurately. A more transactional approach was perceived from the lack of visual cues and the awkwardness associated with pauses during the phone conversation. Virtual care may be better used for certain circumstances but should encompass patient-centred decision making for when and how. Many expressed interests in video options; technology access and user ability are additional considerations for advancing virtual care. Conclusions: The experiences and recommendations from patients and caregivers provide an important contribution to decision-making and integrating and sustaining quality virtual care for patient-centered healthcare service delivery. Keywords: Virtual care experiences, primary care, patient-oriented research, mixed methods, COVID-19.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.354
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.359 · 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