The Third Sector in Integrated Care: Partner, Provider, or Both?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Third-sector organizations (TSOs) are recognized for having a unique and essential role in designing and delivering community-centred, sustainable health and well-being services. A World Café workshop at the 2023 International Conference on Integrated Care to explore perspectives on the questions explored the question: How do we characterize the role of the Third Sector in Integrated Care Systems? Are they Partners, Service Providers, Both or Neither? Attendees from Canada, England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Belgium, Denmark, and the Netherlands shared perspectives regarding facilitators and barriers to engaging TSOs in integrated care systems, drawing on experiences and practices from their communities and health systems. Building from participant perspectives, we posit that while cross-sectoral alliances between government and voluntary organizations are possible, and this engagement can contribute substantial health-promoting value to society, much work remains to be done. Meaningful collaboration requires attitudinal shifts, new working methods, rebalancing power within the relationships, and sufficient resources to support the collaboration. Creative approaches to facilitating positive engagement of TSOs within integrated care systems can address long-standing barriers and misunderstandings. Sharing and learning through research, evaluations, and networks is essential to achieve integrated care systems based on trust and committed collaboration.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".