MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413366189 · doi:10.5334/ijic.nacic24057

Development and Implementation of a System Accountability Framework for Nova Scotia

2025· article· en· W4413366189 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Emily Cichonski, Aruna Mitra, Anuja Panditrao, Joyce Oiwun Cheung, Elizabeth Rogers Salvaterra

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Integrated Care · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova scotiaAccountabilityProcess managementPolitical scienceBusinessPublic administrationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Population growth and comorbidity are driving demand for episodic care and extended community supports creating backlogs in access, particularly for emergency care in Nova Scotia. In an effort to optimize access to care, Nova Scotia Health implemented a cross-sectoral framework to help move patients through their acute care journey. The Framework was led by the Integrated Acute and Episodic Clinical Services Network. IImplementation success requires close partnerships within Nova Scotia Health (e.g. Access and Flow Network, Primary Health Care Network, Perioperative Network, Performance and Analytics, Research and Innovation, Continuing Care) as well as external partners (e.g. Emergency Health Services, Department of Health and Wellness, Department of Seniors and Long Term Care, Department of Community Services). Within each zone of accountability, Network and operational teams collaborated to develop and implement shared metrics and local models and policies that can be mapped to each metric. Ambulance offload time was selected as a state variable that reflects overall flow in the acute care system with a Phase goal of reducing 90th percentile ambulance offload time by 50% (0% per month over 5 months. Tools included models of care, leaning processes, integrating Action for Health Initiatives, policies and reporting templates. Weekly communications and check-in meetings including operational leaders across health sectors provide an opportunity to report on progress and share early successes and opportunities for spread and scale. A dashboard (in development) provides a line of site to weekly performance. The Framework has been integrated as a key support for a larger provincial initiative called Operational Excellence which provides structured reporting and operational grip. Currently in week 4, implementation has already had impact including: This week, there were ,46 inpatient admissions and ,069 discharges. Out of ,372 ambulance offloads in week 4, only 65 took longer than the designated time cut off at the site, a drop from 3 in 2023. 30.6% of ambulance offloads were completed within 30 minutes (compared with 27.8% last year), and 90% were completed within 46.3 minutes (compared with 237 minutes last year). Over 228 ambulance hours were returned to the communities. EHS has reported a decrease in their ambulance response time over the past six months. Current response times for emergency calls are averaging 20 minutes. Efforts continue to address surge capacity, with a focus on implementing strategies and processes to improve provider response times and patient stays. This involves streamlining discharge processes for smoother patient flow.The challenges that the Framework aims to address are common to many health jurisdictions. This initiative demonstrates a real-life implementation of the recommendations supported by the national CAEP EM-POWER report and a view to how providing a system-wide framework can help teams at all levels of care develop and implement improvements that are based on a common shared goal: each patient receives the right care in the right setting, from the right provider. The poster will share challenges and opportunities related to the development and implementation of the Framework.The Framework may inform modification of existing Strategic Deployment Review (SDR) meetings to align more closely with System Accountability. The Framework, and the supporting network of metrics, will help to inform further improvements including frontline care and processes and broader health service planning.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.895

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.098
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.421 · 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
GenreOther

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 venueInternational Journal of Integrated Care→Same topicEvaluation and Performance Assessment→French-language works237,207→