Assessment of Health System Readiness and Quality of Dementia Services in Peru: Protocol for a Qualitative Study With Stakeholder Interviews and Documentation Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dementia is a global health priority with significant challenges due to its complex nature and increasing prevalence. Health systems worldwide struggle to address chronic conditions like dementia, often providing fragmented care. However, information about how health systems respond to the needs of people with dementia and their carers, and the quality of care provided, is scarce in low- and middle-income countries. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the quality of the health system to provide diagnosis and care for people with dementia and their carers in Peru. In order to do this, the study will explore the response of the Peruvian health system to people with dementia and their carers, and explore the experiences of people with dementia of receiving their diagnosis, management, and quality of care for this condition. METHODS: This study is part of a research program called "IMPACT Salud: Innovations using Mhealth for people with dementia and Co-morbidities," aimed at strengthening health systems to provide care for people with dementia and their carers. The study has a descriptive, cross-sectional design that uses a qualitative methodology, including stakeholder interviews and documentation review, and consists of 2 substudies, a health system assessment (HSA) and an exploration of the patient journey. The first substudy uses an HSA methodology suitable for low- and middle-income countries, conducting 160 structured interviews with 12 different stakeholder types across 3 levels of the health system (micro, meso, and macro) in 4 Peruvian regions, each with distinct geographical and urbanization profiles. The second substudy uses a patient journey methodology, which involves conducting 40 in-depth interviews with people with dementia, carers, and health care workers from the same 4 regions. The insights into the people with dementia patient and caregiver experience within the health system from the interviews will be used to produce a patient journey map. The analysis will be guided by the high-quality health system framework, and the findings from the HSA and patient journey will be structured using the domains included in the framework through the lens of quality of services. RESULTS: Data collection began in March 2024. As of the end of September 2024, a total of 156 interviews from the HSA and 38 interviews from the patient journey study have been conducted across 4 regions. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide a national, multilevel insight into the current operation of the Peruvian health system, including an analysis of the quality of services provided with regard to dementia diagnosis, management, and care from the perspectives of stakeholders, patients, and their carers. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/60296.
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 | 0.093 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.006 |
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".