Nationalization of clinical care pathways for inflammatory bowel disease management in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD) are challenging conditions to manage due to the heterogeneity of the disease, diverse treatment options, and nuances of care over a range of ages. Clinical care pathways (CCPs) developed by experts enable health care providers (HCPs) to deliver standardized, high-quality, evidence-based care. In order to remain useful and valuable, these pathways need to evolve alongside changing treatment recommendations. Standardizing IBD care is a priority of Crohn's Colitis Canada's Promoting Access and Care through Centres of Excellence (PACE) network. Aim: To describe the process of nationalizing IBD CCP's, including development, standardization, maintenance, and dissemination. Methods: This project was based on a previously developed structured framework for review and maintenance. The CCP team consisted of a leadership group, advisory council and a working group with diverse representation from the country and areas of expertise. The work was tracked with a database with coordination completed by staff of the national organization. Results: The nationalization process lasted 14 months, with input from 23 HCPs from 14 academic and community institutions across Canada. Sixteen CCPs for IBD care were developed and approved by the CCP team. Challenges encountered included outdated guidelines, differing clinical opinions, and busy clinical schedules of the team members. Translation into French is complete. Support of Crohn's and Colitis Canada was invaluable. Conclusion: Despite anticipated challenges, 16 CCPs received approval from the advisory council and are publicly available to HCPs across Canada. Our approach to this undertaking and the lessons learned may be valuable for experts undertaking similar projects for patients with chronic diseases.
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 | 0.058 | 0.087 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".