MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404792711 · doi:10.1186/s12998-024-00560-1

Enhancing patient-centred chiropractic care in Canada: identifying barriers, enablers, and strategies through a qualitative needs assessment

2024· article· en· W4404792711 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daphne To, Danielle Southerst, Melissa Atkinson-Graham, Hainan Yu, Gaelan Connell, Crystal Draper, Carol Cancelliere

Bibliographic record

VenueChiropractic & Manual Therapies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityCanadian Chiropractic AssociationWomen's College HospitalCanadian Memorial Chiropractic CollegeUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMentorshipChiropracticBest practiceMedicineResource (disambiguation)Qualitative researchMedical educationHealth careQuality (philosophy)NursingKnowledge managementAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Canadian Chiropractic Association (CCA) initiated a quality improvement project to develop best practices aimed at enhancing the patient experience. OBJECTIVES: (1) Identify and prioritise the key moments in the new patient experience that could be improved by providing chiropractors with focused support and resources; (2) explore views, barriers, and enablers to implementing these best practices; and (3) develop recommendations to facilitate the adoption of these practices. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative needs assessment using a human-centred design approach, focused on understanding the needs and experiences of end-users to create tailored solutions. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was employed to explore chiropractors' knowledge use and behaviour change, and TDF domains were mapped to Behaviour Change Techniques (BCTs) to develop targeted strategies for addressing identified barriers and enablers. Thirteen chiropractors from across Canada participated in semi-structured interviews and related activities. RESULTS: The key moments where participants felt they needed the most support were "treatment", "report of findings", "informed consent", "physical examination", and "before the appointment". All participants agreed with the best practices seed statements. Key barriers included gaps in knowledge, communication skills, and resource availability, particularly in rural areas. Enablers included collaboration with other health professionals, mentorship, and access to practice tools. Recommendations include enhanced training in communication and treatment planning, increased access to resources in rural areas, and fostering collaborative relationships among health professionals. CONCLUSION: Understanding the barriers and enablers to implementing best practices can inform targeted strategies to improve patient-centred care in chiropractic practice across Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score0.794

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0170.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChiropractic & Manual TherapiesSame topicMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFrench-language works237,207