MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7116104508 · doi:10.2196/preprints.88921

Co-Building Hospital at Home: Qualitative Descriptive Thematic Analysis of a pan-Canadian Community Participatory Workshop Series (Preprint)

2025· article· W7116104508 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisQualitative researchPublic hospitalCitizen journalismDescriptive statisticsParticipant observationParticipatory action researchWork (physics)Health care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND Virtual health care models, such as Hospital at Home, are an alternative to in-person care, and allow hospitals to expand care capacity and delivery without the need for additional brick-and-mortar structures. While generally well received, there is an overall lack of awareness among those receiving and giving care about what Hospital at Home is and what it does, and uncertainty about the conditions needed to implement Hospital at Home in a safe, sustainable, and equitable way. OBJECTIVE In this descriptive qualitative study, we explored public perceptions of Hospital at Home in Canada to: (1) raise awareness about the program; (2) better understand the perceived benefits and barriers to enable informed decision-making around the national hospital at home agenda; and (3) catalyse key interest holders to ensure equitable access. METHODS Healthcare providers, patients, caregivers, and hospital administrators were recruited through online social media, and professional and community networks. Five 60-minute virtual workshops were held from January to June 2025 using a “Lunch-and-Learn" format and Liberating Structures techniques. The workshops were each comprised of two parts: speaker presentations followed by participant group discussions. The workshop presentations along with 3 written observer reports (from a patient partner, an academic, and a clinician) and workshop participant Slido responses were collected and analyzed. Descriptive thematic analysis was used to identify key themes salient to the data. RESULTS Three themes were constructed from the data: (i) making Hospital at Home work for healthcare systems, (ii) making Hospital at Home work for its people, (iii) making Hospital at Home better now, and in the future. Participants reported generally positive outcomes and high satisfaction with Hospital at Home programs in Canada. Participants highlighted the need for clear communication and collaboration across care teams, technology support for staff, managing health provider and caregiver workloads, and ensuring access for rural and remote communities. There is a need to better understand the economic sustainability of the Hospital at Home program, and to study and share outcomes from Hospital at Home models to help others and refine the model. CONCLUSIONS This study provides insights into how the Hospital at Home virtual care model is perceived by providers, patients, and caregivers in the Canadian healthcare context. Our findings highlight the importance of equity, communication, care workloads, and fiscal sustainability in supporting Hospital at Home models.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
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 score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0230.012
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0040.008
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.382
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

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFrailty in Older Adults→French-language works237,207→