A quality improvement evaluation of a standardized intervention for children with medical complexity transitioning to adult care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with medical complexity have medical fragility, chronic disease, technology dependence, and high healthcare use. Their transition to adult health care at age 18 involves medical and social elements and follows no standardized process. Our goal was to improve transition readiness in children with medical complexity using a transition intervention within a Complex Care program. All children with medical complexity aged 14 to 18 were included in this quality improvement (QI) project (n = 54). We conducted a pre- and post-intervention chart review to assess transition outcomes and implemented a transition intervention for 6 months, which included an age-stratified checklist, charting template, and transition rounds. Before the intervention, 72% of 17- to 18-year-old patients had documented transition discussions, which increased to 86%. Patients with a family physician increased as well (61% to 73% for 17- to 18-year-olds). Three transition education rounds were held. The intervention increased transition readiness, provided tools to facilitate transition, and created a forum for conversation.
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 | 0.013 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".