MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Transitions of older adults between emergency departments and community care in Quebec: a case study

2025· article· en· W4414153048 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Marlène Karam, Catherine Hudon, Maud‐Christine Chouinard, Loïc Vermeulen, Arnaud Duhoux

Bibliographic record

VenueGeriatric Nursing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité de SherbrookeHEC Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPrimary careEconomic shortageTransitional carePopulation ageingOlder peopleFocus groupEmergency departmentHealth carePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Establishing trust and continuity with older adults in the ED is challenging. • Strengthening primary care is crucial to better meet the needs of older adults. • Training efforts and mentorship are needed to support new nurse care coordinators. This study aimed to examine the care coordination processes and challenges between emergency department and primary care interdisciplinary teams, with a focus on the role of nurses in ensuring safe transitions for older adults. A case study was conducted within an Integrated Health and Social Services Centre in Quebec. Two types of data were used: documents and semi-structured interviews with 15 professionals involved in the transition. The Transitional Care Model guided the study. Several challenges were identified, namely establishing trust and continuity with older adults, balancing their wish to return home with ensuring their safety, the limited training of nurses to fulfill this role, the lack of communication across care levels, and the shortage of resources within primary care level. Given the aging population and its complex needs, it is urgent to move away from hospital-centrism and to strengthen primary care to enable older adults to age healthily in their community.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeriatric NursingSame topicEmergency and Acute Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207