MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404795864 · doi:10.1370/afm.22.s1.6753

Primary care workforce planning within integrated care models: Application of a workforce planning toolkit

2024· article· en· W4404795864 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annals of Family Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSocial and Demographic Issues in Germany
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforceWorkforce planningPrimary careWorkforce managementBusinessProcess managementNursingOperations managementKnowledge managementEngineering managementComputer scienceEngineeringMedicinePolitical scienceFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Context:</h3> There is a crisis in the primary care workforce in Canada. While approaches have been developed to support primary care health human resource (HHR) planning, most planning is conducted within sector silos and there are few examples that consider a regional approach within an integrated care system. <h3>Objectives:</h3> 1.Apply a HHR planning framework to one Ontario Health Team, a model of integrated care. 2. Describe the primary care workforce from a regional lens. 3. Develop policy to support regional workforce planning. <h3>Study Design and Analysis:</h3> An exploratory single case study design with concurrent mixed-methods, including key informant interviews, publicly available data and surveys. Regional human resources and population health data was collected from multiple data sources including federal, provincial/territorial, regional, and hospital/primary care levels, along with surveys to all providers. Descriptive analysis was conducted for quantitative data. Qualitative data was analyzed used thematic analysis. Data were merged through pattern matching. Policy recommendations were finalized using a deliberative dialogue. <h3>Setting/Data sets:</h3> One OHT in Eastern Ontario, Canada. Seven federal and provincial data sets, including professional colleges. <h3>Population Studied:</h3> OHT health workforce, including primary care and its attributed patient population. <h3>Intervention:</h3> The Integrated Primary Care Workforce Planning Toolkit was applied to one OHT. <h3>Results:</h3> Fourteen interviews described contextual factors including the current status, driving forces around regional planning, capacity for change and innovative solutions. Data was highly inconsistent across organizations and wide variation in the operational definitions used. Just over half of the attributed population were rostered to a team-based primary care model. Five data sources were required to describe the primary care workforce with an estimated 163 physicians, 33 NPs and 138 interprofessional providers. No consolidated data source existed for non-physician providers and provider raw numbers do not convey details needed for planning. A set of policy recommendations focused on: 1) HHR governance structure within OHTs, 2) consolidation of the primary care workforce, and 3) data and reporting.9 <h3>Conclusions:</h3> There remain significant challenges in obtaining data to inform primary care workforce planning and little infrastructure within Ontario Heath Teams to support regional planning.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.333
Threshold uncertainty score0.585

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.324
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.171 · 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