MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7070487050

Person-centred Care Coordination in Ontario: A Multimethod Evaluation of Implementation and Impact

2021· dissertation· en· W7070487050 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMachine Learning in Bioinformatics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperationalizationHealth careQuality (philosophy)Needs assessmentSocial supportProgram evaluationData collectionHealth care quality
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the number of persons living with complex health and social care needs increases, healthcare systems are faced with the challenge of providing high quality care to these individuals. One approach utilized by many healthcare systems to achieve high quality care for persons living with complex health and social care needs is person-centred care coordination). A gap still exists in our knowledge on how to implement person-centred care coordination in ways that meet individual and family expectations and needs. In addition, more is to be learned about the care experiences of persons receiving person-centred care coordination and their family caregivers.The aim of this dissertation was to fill these gaps by evaluating Health Links by conducting three interconnected studies. In the first study of this dissertation, an implementation evaluation approach was utilized to assess the extent to which the implementation plans of person-centredness, and engagement were operationalized within Health Links. In the second and third studies an impact evaluation approach was employed to assess the care experiences of persons living with complex health and social care needs and their family caregivers after being enrolled in Health Links. In order to assess the care experiences comprehensively, multimethods were used. A patient experience survey was used in the second study and in-depth interviews with enrollees and their caregivers in the third study. \nThe first study concluded that operationalization of implementation plans in network structures like Health Links was faced by numerous challenges. The second study found that the intended components of the Health Links approach (care plan and care coordinator) positively impacted the experience of the enrollees. However, issues with implementation of these components led to a negative care experience. The third study showed that despite being enrolled in an initiative that aimed at delivering person-centred care coordination, persons living with complex health and social care needs and their family caregivers were still shouldering the main burden of care coordination. \nThe findings of the three studies can guide policy makers, planners, implementers, and evaluators on how to better plan, deliver and evaluate person-centred care coordination (integrated patient care) interventions.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.306 · 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