Rapid Review of Transition Outcomes in Youth with Rheumatic Diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives The transition from pediatric to adult healthcare for adolescents with chronic rheumatic diseases is associated with an increased risk of experiencing gaps in care and adverse health outcomes. Despite advancements in structured transition programs, there is currently a lack of standard, validated outcomes to evaluate transitional care. The objective of this study was to systematically review and synthesize the available literature on transition outcomes in rheumatology. Methods In the present rapid review, peer-reviewed articles were included if they: (a) included youth (age 12-24) diagnosed with a chronic rheumatic disease transitioning to adult rheumatology care or who had transitioned to adult care; (b) examined structured transition programs, or various aspects of the transition process (including routine follow-up); (c) reported on relevant transition outcomes; (d) were published between 2009 and 2024; and (e) were published in English. Four online databases (Scopus, Medline, Embase, and CINAHL) were searched. Eligible studies were reviewed and extracted data was synthesized. Results A total of 28 studies were included in this rapid review. Numerous outcomes were identified that emphasized the complex nature of the transition process. Quality of life, healthcare utilization, patient satisfaction, disease activity and medication adherence were the most frequently reported outcomes. Psychosocial and parental outcomes were less commonly reported, highlighting gaps in the current literature. No single or core set of outcomes were reported across all studies. Conclusion The findings of this review underscore the need for comprehensive and standardized outcome measures to accurately assess and compare transition programs. Future research should prioritize efforts to refine and validate transition outcomes in order to facilitate effective evaluation and improvement of the transition process.
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 | 0.014 | 0.072 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.027 | 0.023 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".