Transitional care programs for older adults moving from hospital to home in Canada: A systematic review of text and opinion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Investing in transitional care programs is critical for ensuring continuity of health and coordinated care for older adults transitioning across health settings. However, literature delineating the scope of transitional care programs across Canada is limited. The aim of this systematic review of text and opinion is to characterize Canadian transitional care programs for older adults transitioning from hospital to home. METHODS: Following JBI guidelines for systematic review of text and opinion, we conducted a search of Canadian grey literature sources published online between 2016 to 2023. A 3-phase search was undertaken for: 1) Canadian databases and organizational websites; 2) advanced Google search of national sources and news media reports; and 3) advanced Google search of provincial/territorial sources. Two reviewers independently screened sources for eligibility against inclusion criteria. Data were extracted by one reviewer and verified by a second. Textual data were extracted from multiple sources to characterize each transitional care program. RESULTS: Grey literature search produced a total of 17,092 text and opinion sources, identifying 119 transitional care programs in Canada. Model of care was a key characteristic defining the design and delivery of transitional care programs within community (n = 42), hospital (n = 45), and facility-based (n = 32) settings. Programs were characterized by goal, population and eligibility, setting and length of program, intervention and services, and healthcare team members. Patient, caregiver, and health system outcomes were reported for 18 programs. The province of Ontario has the most transitional care programs (n = 84) and reported outcomes, followed by British Columbia (n = 10). CONCLUSIONS: Characterizing transitional care programs is important for informing health services planning and scaling up of transitional care program models across Canada. Recognizing transitional care programs as a core health service is critical to meet the health care needs of older adults at the right time and place. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ID 298821.
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 | 0.025 | 0.107 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.027 | 0.035 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".