MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7114989896 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxaf116.013

13 Improving Developmental Paediatric Care for Equity-Deserving Patients: Using a quality improvement approach to develop a care pathway between a Complex Developmental Conditions diagnostic clinic and Social Paediatrics initiative

2025· article· en· W7114989896 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalSunny Hill Health Centre for ChildrenUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReferralIndigenousQuality managementPsychological interventionChild developmentSocial workHealth careMedical home

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background It is well known that Indigenous patients face structural racism within the Canadian healthcare system. The Excluded report from the British Columbia Representative for Child and Youth found that Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) is viewed as an “Indigenous problem” throughout Canadian healthcare settings. Recommendation 7 from this report urges review of referral pathways for FASD diagnosis, addressing systemic bias and enhancing family support. The Complex Development and Behavioural Conditions (CDBC) Program diagnoses complex developmental concerns, including FASD, and receives referrals from the RICHER (Responsive, Intersectoral, Child and Community Health, Education, and Research) social paediatrics initiative, serving equity-deserving communities, including Indigenous families, in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. Objectives In response to report recommendations, this project aims to ensure families feel understood and well-supported during developmental assessments. Specifically, our objective is to ensure that, within 1 year of implementing program changes, >95% of families referred from the RICHER initiative will feel their needs are understood and that they are supported while their child undergoes a complex developmental assessment through the CDBC program. Design/Methods Interviews with 8 RICHER and CDBC clinicians identified key improvement themes. 5 Indigenous families with assessment experience completed online surveys addressing these themes, revealing need for longitudinal support during the assessment process. A Social Support Form was created based on feedback, aiming to collect information about children and families’ circle of support at the point of referral to support inclusion in the patient journey. The form was attached to 5 RICHER-to-CDBC referrals to initiate a PDSA cycle, utilizing pre- and post-test feedback from families and clinicians to implement program improvements. Outcome measures include percentage of families feeling supported and that their needs are understood. Process measures include percentage of families offered support by the Indigenous Health Team, offering of transportation support, and number of patient complaints. Balancing measures include no-show rates, extra care provider time spent, and appointment booking time delays. Results Initial findings of this initiative show that physician and clinician stakeholders have expansive ideas for improvement of the care experience of families referred to CDBC (Table 1). Further, exploring family assessment experiences finds actionable areas for program improvement (Table 2). A RICHER-CDBC Social Support Form was created in response to feedback from stakeholders and families, and will expand the referral package to include important information regarding family supports. We predict PDSA cycles for implementation of this referral addendum will result in families feeling more supported and will inform assessment recommendations. Conclusion This project highlights that community and tertiary care programs must work together to improve care for equity-deserving families, and that family voices must be forefront in the improvement of paediatric provincial healthcare programming. We predict implementation of our Social Support Form will allow for improved support of families with attention to community, family, school, and cultural connections, and consideration of transportation and healthcare needs throughout the CDBC assessment process and informed recommendations resulting from assessment.

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)0.044
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0440.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0040.016
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects→French-language works237,207→