Developing an interprofessional decision support tool for diabetic foot ulcers management in primary care within the family medicine group model: a Delphi study in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Primary care professionals encounter difficulties coordinating the continuum of care between primary care providers and second-line specialists and adhere to practice guidelines pertaining to diabetic foot ulcers management. Family medicine groups are providing primary care services aimed to improve access, interdisciplinary care, coordination and quality of health services, and reduce emergency department visits. Most professionals working in family medicine groups are primary care physicians and registered nurses. The aim of this study was to develop and validate an interprofessional decision support tool to guide the management of diabetic foot ulcers for primary care professionals working within the family medicine group model. METHODS: A one-page decision tool developed by the research team was validated by an expert panel using a three-round Delphi protocol held between December 2019 and August 2021. The tool includes 43 individual actions and a care pathway from initial presentation to secondary prevention. Data collection was realized with both paper and electronic questionnaires, and answers were compiled in an electronic spreadsheet. Data was analyzed with use of descriptive statistics, and consensus for each item was defined as ≥ 80% agreement. RESULTS: Experts from 12 pre-identified professions of the diabetic foot ulcer interdisciplinary care team were included, 39 participants out of the 59 invited to first round (66.1%), 34 out of 39 for second (87.2%) and 22 out of 34 for third (64.7%) rounds. All items included in the final version of the decision support tool reached consensus and were deemed clear, relevant and feasible. One or more professionals were identified to be responsible for every action to be taken. CONCLUSIONS: This study provided a comprehensive decision support tool to guide primary care professionals in the management of diabetic foot ulcers. Implementation and evaluation in the clinical setting will need to be undertaken in the future.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".