Establishing primary care physician commitment in Canadian long-term care homes: a protocol for a modified e-Delphi study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The delivery of medical services by primary care physicians (PCPs) in long-term care (LTC) homes lacks consistency. There is no Canadian standard for PCP commitment in the LTC home setting, which can influence the quality of care delivered and resident health outcomes. The PCP's commitment to LTC practice is theorised as the proportion of a physician's practice dedicated to LTC, the number of residents for whom they provide care and the time spent on individual resident encounters. We aim to establish consensus on expectations concerning PCP commitment in Canadian LTC homes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We describe a protocol for a two-round modified e-Delphi study assessing the consensus of an expert panel, guided by the RAND methodological guidance for conducting Delphi panels and the ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document (ACCORD) guideline for healthcare-based consensus studies. We will recruit pan-Canadian experts who demonstrate extensive knowledge and experience in medical care delivery and medical practice models in the Canadian LTC sector. A literature review will generate a candidate list of statements constituting PCP commitment. The first round evaluates the relevance and feasibility of candidate statements through an online questionnaire. Panellists may also write open-ended, qualitative responses to add rationales, suggest alternatives and share new ideas. We will then host a virtual synchronous meeting to have an in-depth discussion about the results from round one. A second questionnaire will be distributed to evaluate the remaining statements that have not reached consensus, and any new statements added based on the same criteria. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board (Project ID #17321) approved our study. The findings will be disseminated through manuscripts, presentations, and the lead author's thesis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The ISRCTN Registry: #35125526.
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 | 0.138 | 0.085 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.046 | 0.008 |
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".