Experience of pediatric to adult transition in immunology services: patient experience questionnaire and micro-costing analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effective transition from pediatric to adult care for individuals with chronic medical conditions should address the medical, psychosocial and educational needs of the cohort. The views and experiences of service users and their families are an integral component of service development. This study sought to evaluate the current provision of transition services from pediatric immunology services to adult immunology services for patients with a diagnosis of an inborn error of immunity at St. James's Hospital, Dublin. We gathered patient perspectives on the experience of the transition process using a structured survey. In addition, we adopted a micro-costing technique to estimate the cost of implementing the current standard of care for these patients. Results of a micro-costing analysis suggest that the most significant component of cost in assessing these patients is on laboratory investigation, an area where there is likely significant duplication between pediatric and adult care. Perspectives from patients suggested that the transition period went well for the majority of the cohort and that they felt ready to move to adult services, but the transition was not without complications in areas such as self-advocacy and medication management. The transition process may benefit from enhanced communication and collaboration between pediatric and adult services.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".