Interdisciplinary Care for Geriatric Syndromes in CKD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Key Points Addressing geriatric syndromes in CKD likely requires implementation of an interdisciplinary model of care. Experts shared multilevel barriers to implementation of this model and strategies to mitigate each barrier. Experts felt that patient satisfaction and clinician burnout could improve with implementing interdisciplinary care in CKD. Background Despite their prevalence, prognostic significance, and prioritization by patients, key geriatric syndromes, such as cognitive impairment, frailty, and depression, are not routinely addressed in CKD care in the United States (US). In an interdisciplinary care model, health professionals with diverse expertise collaborate to address all symptoms and functional impairments occurring alongside a patient's chronic disease. Thus, routinely addressing geriatric syndromes in CKD may require implementing this evidence-based model of care and adapting it to the needs of patients with CKD. In a formative step to understanding how health systems could implement an interdisciplinary model of care to address geriatric syndromes in CKD, we interviewed health professionals around the world with relevant expertise. Methods We conducted a qualitative study informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. We interviewed nephrologists, administrators, geriatricians, palliative medicine specialists, subspecialists, and allied health professionals working in other interdisciplinary clinics from the United States, United Kingdom, India, and Canada. We analyzed results using an inductive-deductive approach. Results Thematic saturation occurred at 42 experts. Three major domains emerged: barriers to implementation, strategies to mitigate barriers, and benefits of implementation. Barriers were categorized into overarching themes related to ( 1 ) aging-friendly policy and workforce availability, ( 2 ) organizational culture and structure, and ( 3 ) nephrologist and patient perceptions. Strategies to mitigate barriers were categorized into themes related to ( 1 ) demonstrating viability, ( 2 ) facilitating effective health communication, ( 3 ) soliciting support from administrators and clinicians, and ( 4 ) expanding the base for patient information and treatment evidence. Proposed benefits of implementation included improved shared decision making and reduced nephrologist burnout. Conclusions Implementing an interdisciplinary model of care that addresses geriatric syndromes in CKD is possible but will require overcoming policy-related, financial, cultural, and structural barriers. Such a model of care may ultimately benefit patients and nephrologists.
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 | 0.012 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".