Analysis of case management as a service delivery model in Ontario's Home Care sector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined how case management is operationalized in Ontario Community Care Access Centres (CCACs). It also explored the specific goals of case management that are defined by CCACs and perceived as important to case managers. Case manager perceptions about goal achievement as well as the factors that help/hinder goal attainment were also elicited. The overall purpose was to contribute to the literature by reflecting the Canadian context. The study represents a first-time effort to systematically consolidate case management data reflecting the provincial experience. A multi-site, multi-phase, multi-method approach was used to achieve the research objectives. The study was conceptually anchored in the body of knowledge aggregated from case management literature. Literature data also guided the design of the survey tool used to capture informant perceptions about case management goals, goal achievement and associated help/hinder factors. The program logic model was used as an overall organizing structure to guide the preliminary analysis of the major elements, processes and goals of case management programs. A multi-level hierarchical typology was developed to classify case management approaches. Consistent with the literature, findings reveal that diverse case management models are in use across the province. Eight different exemplars emerged from the data. In addition, four context-specific and three emerging case management approaches were identified. The hierarchical typology constructed for use in this study clearly demonstrates that multi-level approaches to case management are being applied to suit varying geographic contexts, client conditions and/or environmental circumstances. For this reason, it is concluded that a pluralistic and pragmatic approach to case management is operant in CCACs. Despite the diversity of case management approaches throughout Ontario, data indicate that there is general consensus about the goals of case management. Survey findings show disparate views of front-line case managers regarding their ability to achieve the goals of case management. CCAC informants provide valuable insights about the factors that help/hinder goal achievement throughout Ontario. Their perceptions contribute important data reflecting the Canadian experience that will add to the case management literature while providing focus for a future research agenda.
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 | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".