MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7117315716 · doi:10.1002/alz70858_100406

Patient and care partner perceptions of the new Multispecialty Interprofessional Team primary care‐based memory clinics across four Canadian provinces

2025· article· en· W7117315716 on OpenAlexaffabout
L. Lee, Loretta M. Hillier, Michael Lee, Tejal Patel, Carrie McAiney

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster UniversityResearch Institute for Aging
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimary careMemory clinicPerceptionDementiaPatient satisfactionPrimary health careHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Multispecialty Interprofessional Team (MINT) Memory Clinics manage dementia and other memory disorders at a primary care-level. Established in Ontario, with over 100 clinics, this care model has recently expanded to four other Canadian provinces. This study describes patient and care partner experience with this new care model. METHODS: Satisfaction surveys were distributed in 14 newly established clinics, across four Canadian provinces, to patients and care partners following their clinic assessment. Survey completion was anonymous. Five-point rating scales ("strongly disagree" to "strongly agree") were used to rate appointment timeliness, quality of explanations, satisfaction with time spent, understanding of symptoms/ condition, willingness to recommend the clinic to others, value of the clinic in addition to regular primary care; overall satisfaction with the visit was measured ("very dissatisfied" to "very satisfied"). Qualitive analysis of an open-ended comment question captured respondents' perceptions about the visit. RESULTS: Satisfaction surveys were completed by 338 out of 748 individuals (45%) over six months: 162 patients, 169 care partners, 7 did not specify. There were no statistically significant differences in ratings between patients and care partners. The majority of respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with their clinic visit (88%). The majority of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they received an appointment in good time (95%), their questions were adequately addressed (93%), they were satisfied with the amount of time the team spent with them (95%), they had a better understanding of the condition (88%), they would recommend the memory clinic to others (94%), and the clinic was value added to their regular primary care (94%). Analysis of the open-ended question identified that respondents valued having access to the clinic, the team approach, team members' expertise and caring demeanor, and the comfortable assessment atmosphere. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates high levels of patient and care partner satisfaction with MINT memory clinic care across 14 clinics in 4 provinces. This model meets the needs of individuals and families living with dementia and other memory disorders and offers a significant opportunity to build capacity within primary care for timely access to comprehensive, multispecialty memory assessment and care across Canada.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration→French-language works237,207→