Evaluation of an interprofessional school-based health centre: A multimethods study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: School-based health centres (SBHCs) aim to improve access to care, especially among socially vulnerable children. Interprofessional SBHCs are emerging, though their evaluations remain limited. We evaluated an interprofessional SBHC in a low-income community. Methods: The evaluation of the SBHCs was guided by the RE-AIM framework. The multimethods design included (i) a document analysis and (ii) a retrospective chart review of SBHC patients from September 2021 to May 2024. Results: The SBHC team comprised of paediatricians, a dietitian, occupational therapist, speech language pathologist, and a nurse working alongside school staff and community providers. After 98 clinic half-days, 760 appointments were scheduled across 153 patients, with a nonattendance rate of 12%. Care needs extended beyond preventative medicine for 80% of children, with mental health conditions being the most common diagnoses. Conclusion: This evaluation demonstrates that interprofessional SBHCs are feasible and offer a scalable model for addressing the complex health needs of socially vulnerable children.
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 | 0.029 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".