MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413185218 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxaf063

Canadian paediatric tertiary care hospitals’ response to the needs of children with medical complexity during acute visits and hospitalisations: A landscape study

2025· article· en· W4413185218 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrea Whiteley, Sadaf Ghanbari Miandoab, Sophie Marsolais, Anne-Josée Côté, Evelyne D Trottier, Graham C. Thompson, Samina Ali, P Elton, Peter J. Gill, Audrey Lim, Tammie Dewan, Nathalie Gaucher

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Policy and Management
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteAlberta Children's HospitalMcMaster UniversityCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de MontréalUniversity of CalgaryMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTertiary careMedicineAcute careFamily medicineMedical emergencyPediatricsHealth carePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Children with medical complexity (CMC) have unique specialized needs accessing and receiving care in paediatric hospitals. Objectives: To identify the organizational resources available for the care of CMC in Canadian tertiary care paediatric hospitals and to assess key informants' understanding of how these resources are adapted to CMC's needs. Methods: For this environmental scan, key informants representing paediatric hospital medicine/complex care (PHM/CC) and paediatric emergency medicine (PEM) from all 15 Canadian tertiary care paediatric hospitals completed questionnaires. Participants were identified through national research networks. Following Burns methodology, two novel survey tools were developed and administered via a teleconference or electronically. Results: = 30, response rate: 100%). Most (12/15) hospitals had a CC program; of those with a program, 9/12 offered inpatient and outpatient services. For hospitalized CMC, few hospitals had CC dedicated wards (2/15) or healthcare professionals (4/15). Although 10/12 CC programs reported offering a consultation service to their emergency department (ED), most (9/10) were only available on weekdays. PHM/CC respondents believed their inpatient CC team communicated and coordinated effectively (9/12) and facilitated continuity of care (6/12). PEM respondents suggested improving access to patients' documents (10/15), improving CC program availability (8/15) and adapting ED physical spaces (7/15). Conclusions: Most Canadian paediatric tertiary care hospitals have a CC program, but their resources and availability vary. There are many opportunities for improvement for the ED and inpatient care of CMC.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.425

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicHealthcare Policy and Management→French-language works237,207→