MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405925763 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-090527

Scoping review of social workers’ professional roles in primary care

2024· article· en· W4405925763 on OpenAlexaff
Rachelle Ashcroft, Peter Sheffield, Keith Adamson, Glenda Webber, Benjamin Walsh, Louis-François Dallaire, Deepy Sur, Connor Kemp, Jennifer Rayner, Simon Lam, Judith Belle Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversité LavalNewfoundland and Labrador Centre for Applied Health ResearchAccess Alliance Multicultural Health and Community ServicesCanadian Political Science AssociationCovenant HealthUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePrimary careSocial workNursingFamily medicineMedical education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Maximising social workers' contributions to primary care requires clarity about their scope of practice in this context. This scoping review sought to clarify what is known about social work's scope of practice in primary care settings. DESIGN: A scoping review design guided by the five-stage scoping review framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley and the updated JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. DATA SOURCES: 204 articles, published between 2013 and 2023 and obtained from the following seven databases, were reviewed: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Social Work Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts and Scopus. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Peer-reviewed articles that included a focus on social work and primary care, written in English, published between 2013 and 2023 and not restricted by geographical location. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Social workers' scope of practice in primary care was assessed in terms of role; health conditions, patient populations, social issues addressed; location of practice and modality for care delivery; range of providers that social workers collaborate and methods of collaboration. RESULTS: Results indicate that primary care social workers advance comprehensive, patient-centred, continuity of care and benefit both patients and other providers within primary care teams. Social workers undertake a range of roles, activities and functions in primary care settings-spanning direct patient care, team processes and community engagement. Social workers in primary care are involved in supporting patients with a robust range of mental, behavioural and neurodevelopmental conditions, as well as other acute and chronic health conditions. Most social workers are physically co-located within a team and are collaborating with a wide range of providers within and outside of the team. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review contributes clarity about social work's capacity for enhancing the delivery of primary care. Social work's role in primary care facilitates comprehensive, continuous and patient-centred care that improves the experiences of both patients and teams. Social work clinicians, leaders and scholars are encouraged to seek out opportunities to participate in and undertake research identifying these contributions to primary care.

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)0.079
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.221
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.416

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0790.221
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.006
Bibliometrics0.0290.033
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.415 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207