Co-development of a public primary care occupational therapy and physical therapy telephone consultation service
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: In recent years, given significant challenges with accessing primary care physicians in Canada, there has been increased attention towards involving other health care providers, such as rehabilitation professionals, for managing different conditions. For instance, persons with symptoms related to musculoskeletal disorders, chronic pain, mobility limitations, or long COVID, for instance, could benefit from rapid access to advice and education by rehabilitation professionals, but access to public rehabilitation services is currently limited in the Canadian health care system. The implementation of a public primary care telephone consultation service provided by occupational therapists and physical therapists was identified as a promising strategy to help better meet population needs and reduce the use of other costly services (e.g. emergency room visits, unnecessary medical consultations, imaging tests, medication). Objective: To co-develop a public telephone consultation service provided by occupational therapists and physiotherapists in Canada’s second most densely populated province, Québec. Study Design and Analysis: This partnership-based co-development project included a review of available scientific and gray literature, as well as critical reflection and discussion meetings. The co-development was guided by the intervention mapping process and led to the production of a detailed logic model for the innovation. Data set and Population Studied: Representatives of the research team, healthcare network practitioners, as well as managers from the Ministry of health worked together to gather and analyse content from the different data sources to build the logic model for the innovation. Intervention, Outcome measures and Results: The logic model produced details the objectives, nature of interventions, target populations, inputs, activities, and outputs for this innovation. The rationale underlying the implementation of the telephone consultation service was founded on three main axes: 1)Providing rapid access to professional advice and recommendations to the population, 2)Optimizing the use of professional expertise adapted to population needs, 3)Improving population selfmanagement and quality of life. Conclusion: This project allowed to consolidate a partnership through the co-development of the telephone consultation services. The next step will be the development and implementation of a pilot project of the primary care innovation.
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 | 0.035 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
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".