The development and validation of a conceptual definition of avoidable transitions from long‐term care to the emergency department: A mixed methods study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background/Objectives Transitions to and from Emergency Departments (EDs) can be detrimental to long‐term care (LTC) residents and burden the healthcare system. While reducing avoidable transfers is imperative, various terms are used interchangeably including inappropriate, preventable, or unnecessary transitions. Our study objectives were to develop a conceptual definition of avoidable LTC‐ED transitions and to verify the level of stakeholder agreement with this definition. Methods The EX amining A ged C are T ransitions study adopted an exploratory sequential mixed‐method design. The study was conducted in 2015–2016 in 16 LTC facilities, 1 ED, and 1 Emergency Medical Service (EMS) in a major urban center in western Canada. Phase 1 included 80 participants, (healthcare aides, licensed practical nurses, registered nurses, LTC managers, family members of residents, and EMS staff). We conducted semistructured interviews ( n = 25) and focus groups ( n = 19). In Phase 2, 327 ED staff, EMS staff, LTC staff, and medical directors responded to a survey based on the qualitative findings. Results Avoidable transitions were attributed to limited resources in LTC, insufficient preventive care, and resident or family wishes. The definition generated was: A transition of an LTC resident to the ED is considered avoidable if: (a) Diagnostic testing, medical assessment, and treatment can be accessed in a timely manner by other means; (b) the reasons for a transfer are unclear and the transition would increase the disorientation, pain, or discomfort of a resident, outweighing a clear benefit of a transfer; and (c) the transition is against the wishes expressed by the resident over time, including through informal and undocumented conversations. There was a high level of agreement with the definition across the four participant groups. Conclusions and Implications To effectively reduce LTC resident avoidable transitions, stakeholders must share a common definition. Our conceptual definition may significantly contribute to improved care for LTC residents.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".