Content Coding for Contextualization of Care

Author:

Weiner Saul J.12345,Kelly Brendan12345,Ashley Naomi12345,Binns-Calvey Amy12345,Sharma Gunjan12345,Schwartz Alan12345,Weaver Frances M.12345

Affiliation:

1. Jesse Brown VA Medical Center, Chicago, IL (SJW, NA, AB, GS)

2. VA Center for Management of Complex Chronic Care, Chicago, IL (SJW, BK, NA, AB, GS, FMW)

3. University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL (SJW, BK, NA, AB, GS, AS)

4. Edward Hines VA Medical Center, Hines, IL (BK, FMW)

5. Stritch School of Medicine, Loyola University (FMW)

Abstract

Background and Objective. Adapting best evidence to the care of the individual patient has been characterized as “contextualizing care” or “patient-centered decision making” (PCDM). PCDM incorporates clinically relevant, patient-specific circumstances and behaviors, that is, the patient’s context, into formulating a contextually appropriate plan of care. The objective was to develop a method for analyzing physician-patient interactions to ascertain whether decision making is patient centered. Methods. Patients carried concealed audio recorders during encounters with their physicians. Recordings and medical records were reviewed for clues that contextual factors, such as an inability to pay for a medication or competing responsibilities, might undermine an otherwise appropriate care plan, rendering it ineffective. Iteratively, the team refined a coding process to achieve high interrater agreement in determining (a) whether the clinician explored the clues—termed “contextual red flags”—for possible underlying contextual factors affecting care, (b) whether the presence of contextual factors was confirmed and, if so, (c) whether they were addressed in the final care plan. Results. A medical record data extraction instrument was developed to identify contextual red flags such as missed appointments or loss of control of a treatable chronic condition which signal that contextual factors may be affecting care. Interrater agreement (Cohen’s kappa) for coding whether the clinician explored contextual red flags, whether a contextual factor was identified, and whether the factors were addressed in the care plan was 88% (0.76, P < 0.001), 94% (0.88, P < 0.001), and 85% (0.69, P < 0.001) respectively. Conclusions. PCDM can be assessed with high interrater agreement using a protocol that examines whether essential contextual information (when present) is addressed in the plan of care.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Health Policy

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3