MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407978295 · doi:10.1177/26335565251323748

Implementation of the virtual transitional care stroke intervention for older adults with stroke and multimorbidity: A qualitative descriptive study

2025· article· en· W4407978295 on OpenAlexafffund
Maureen Markle‐Reid, Kathryn Fisher, Kimberly M. Walker, Jill I. Cameron, David Dayler, Rebecca Fleck, A. Gafni, Rebecca Ganann, Ken Hajas, Barbara Koetsier, Robert Mahony, Chris Pollard, Jim Prescott, Tammy Rooke, Carly Whitmore

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Multimorbidity and Comorbidity · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsHotel Dieu Shaver Health and Rehabilitation CentreSt. Michael's HospitalToronto Rehabilitation InstituteCARE CanadaSt Joseph's Health CareUniversity of TorontoParkwood InstituteMcMaster UniversityImpact
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsThematic analysisStaffingIntervention (counseling)Service delivery frameworkTransitional careNursingMedicineRandomized controlled trialDescriptive statisticsHealth careQualitative researchService (business)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Older adults with stroke and multimorbidity experience frequent care transitions, which are often poorly coordinated and fragmented. We conducted a pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT) to test the implementation and effectiveness of the Transitional Care Stroke Intervention (TCSI), a 6-month, multi-component, evidence-informed intervention to support older adults with stroke and multimorbidity using outpatient stroke rehabilitation services. The TCSI was designed to support self-management, improve health outcomes, and enhance the quality and experience of care transitions. Objective: To explore the facilitators and challenges to implementing the TCSI, from the perspective of healthcare providers (HCPs) (n = 12) and Managers (n = 3). Methods: Data collection and analysis were guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Data were collected from study documents, individual and group interviews conducted with HCPs and a Care Coordinator, and surveys from managers. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Intervention implementation was facilitated by: a) strong collaborative and interdependent HCP team relationships, b) dedicated resources (funding, staffing) to support intervention delivery, c) training and ongoing support, customized to individual HCP needs, d) organizational readiness, strong leadership, and effective champions, e) structures to facilitate virtual information-sharing, and f) regular monitoring of intervention implementation. Implementation challenges included: a) COVID-19 related challenges (staff turnover, community service disruptions), b) poor communication with community service providers, c) documentation burden (intervention-related), and d) virtual care delivery. Conclusions: This research enhances understanding of the diversity of factors influencing implementation of the TCSI, and the conditions under which implementation is more likely to succeed.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Multimorbidity and ComorbiditySame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207