Optimising regional care delivery systems targeting adults with heart failure and mental health interconnected conditions: a participatory action research study protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Brain and heart conditions are among the leading causes of illness and mortality in Canada. Heart failure is one of the fastest-growing cardiovascular conditions globally, with more than 100 000 Canadians diagnosed each year. Individuals with heart failure are at significantly increased risk of mental health challenges such as depression, anxiety and stress. However, healthcare services often remain siloed, treating physical and mental health separately. This complicates care for individuals with multiple chronic conditions. This multiyear study will adapt, test and accelerate changes to regional care delivery models in Eastern Ontario to optimise brain-heart health and generate knowledge to support the spread and scale of effective interventions that address community needs and priorities. We aim to: (1) identify resource gaps by mapping available services; (2) document strengths and challenges in care delivery; and (3) co-design, pilot test and evaluate an intervention developed based on the priority gap area(s) identified through objectives (1) and (2). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This community-based participatory action research study is led by a research coalition of patient and caregiver partners, care providers and leadership staff from two Ontario Health Teams. In Year 1, we will conduct asset mapping and community consultations with individuals living with heart failure, caregivers, care providers and service organisations to identify care gaps, strengths and opportunities for improvement around modifiable behavioural risk factors and brain-heart health. A scoping review will identify evidence-based strategies to address care gaps and inform the co-design of an intervention focused on supporting individuals with brain-heart interconnected conditions. In Year 2, we will co-design an intervention with community partners for implementation with clinical test sites. Year 3 will involve pilot testing the intervention and conducting outcome and process evaluations. This will inform future spread and scale of the intervention to other brain-heart conditions and new jurisdictions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is approved by the Bruyère Health Research Ethics Board (M16-24-016). Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and knowledge mobilisation activities such as social media, community events and local media outreach, as well as through dedicated engagement with Ontario Health partners and the Brain-Heart Interconnectome Network via retreats and collaborative forums.
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 | 0.106 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.046 | 0.008 |
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".