MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410523690 · doi:10.1136/bmjoq-2025-qshu.185

185 Making the mandatory meaningful – leveraging regulatory requirements to achieve system improvement

2025· article· en· W4410523690 on OpenAlexaff
Tara A. Burra, Achal Mishra, Rosalie Steinberg, Karen Wang, Lesley Wiesenfeld, Andrea Waddell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Business

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Mandatory regulatory/College obligations can seem burdensome and feel like they pull you away from meaningful work. The College of Physicians and Surgeons Ontario (CPSO) in Canada has a QI partnership program for hospital-based physicians. This program makes QI activities a mandatory requirement of the regulatory college. One must complete a project to maintain their licensure. Hospital departments can sign up for a group QI project which is often less burdensome to physicians than an individual project. This also allows the hospital to align a project with a larger quality goal. In Ontario, Canada, three separate hospitals undertook this College program to improve psychiatric care.Case Studies Improving Communication at DischargeWaypoint Centre for Mental Health Care is a 315 bed psychiatric hospital located in Central Ontario. Transitions in care and the discharge summary were identified as the priority focus based on incident reviews. Twenty-five physicians participated in completing 5–10 self-directed chart reviews with peer feedback, auditing more than 100 records and identifying areas for improvement related to timeliness, distribution and formatting of discharge summaries. The results of this work informed the development of a dashboard to track discharge summary completion and display timely feedback to physicians. The work supported the business case for the redevelopment of the discharge summary in alignment with feedback from the QI program and our community providers. This discharge summary format has been adopted at two additional mental health facilities.Suicide Risk AssessmentMount Sinai Hospital is a general hospital with 400 beds in Toronto, Canada. Chart reviews demonstrated wide variation in the documentation of suicide risk assessment and intervention across psychiatric inpatient and outpatient programs. Leveraging the CPSO partnership program, we introduced the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (CSSRS) to standardize suicide risk assessment and recruited 25 physicians to participate. A pilot implementation undertaken on one inpatient service between October 2023 to October 2024 yielded an increase in use of the CSSRS Screener from 43/268 (16.0%, pre-intervention) to 180/497 (36.2%, post-intervention). To spread from this pilot, in September 2024, an electronic version of the CSSRS was incorporated into the electronic patient record for outpatients. Between September and December 2024, the CSSRS Screener was completed for 321/448 (71.6%) of newly referred patients. Individualized audit and feedback to physicians will be used to sustain these gains and further enhance standardization to improve patient safety.Measurement Based CareThe Department of Psychiatry at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, a 1325-bed general hospital in Toronto, Canada, aimed to address low utilization of Measurement-Based Care (MBC) among psychiatrists. At baseline, only 18% used scales to inform treatment decisions. The Department launched several iterative interventions including use of personalized monthly audit-feedback reports, individual coaching sessions, and opportunities for self-reflection. After 1 year, results demonstrated an increase in sustained MBC adherence from 25% to 57.5%. Some early-adopters maintained adherence above 70%. Barriers to adoption included practitioner skepticism regarding accuracy and utility of measures compared to clinical judgment, administrative workflow challenges and lack of an integrated EMR. Enablers included administrative support and offering patients the opportunity to discuss their improvements. This project highlights the need for stakeholder engagement, ongoing audit and feedback, and addressing administrative burden to sustain MBC implementation and inform future scale and spread of MBC in mental health settings more broadly.Conclusion Participation in the regulatory college’s quality improvement partnership has been an effective lever to enhance physician engagement in adopting best practices in psychiatry including: improving the timeliness and quality of discharge communications, adopting a standardized approach to suicide risk assessment, and using measurement based care. Each project highlights the need for stakeholder engagement, audit and feedback, and addressing system level issues to facilitate clinician behaviour change.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.090
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.090
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.004

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.295 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiomedical Ethics and RegulationFrench-language works237,207