Expectations of stakeholders regarding technology in home care to optimise the functional autonomy of clients
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose : In Quebec, administrators of home care are more and more open to offering smart environments as part of services to maintain at home individuals facing an important loss of autonomy. Nonetheless, the implementation of technology in the context of home care requires the involvement of other stakeholders including care providers, clients and their families. The influence of care providers on the implementation of technology within the healthcare system is documented (Cf. Reviews1 2). However, little information is available about the implementation of technology in the community as well as the perspective of the clients and their families. Consequently, stakeholders in home care may not have the same expectations as those working in an institutional setting. Acceptance of technology is not the only barrier to the implementation, other factors such as social, technical, and organizational context can play a role. \n \nMethod : Prior to implementing technology within home care services of an Integrated University Health and Social Services Centre in Montreal (Quebec), the purpose of this qualitative study was to evaluate the perspectives of multiple stakeholders in regards to: (1) facilitators and barriers to maintaining individuals at risk of self-neglect at home; and (2) expectations toward technology to optimise the functional autonomy of this clientele. lndividuals and group interviews were conducted with administrators (n = 2), head of services (n=S), care providers (n = 8), as well as clients at risk of \nself-neglect (n = 5) and their caregivers (n = 3). Data was analyzed using the approach of Miles, Huberman and \nSaldana. \n \nResults & Discussion : Perspectives of stakeholders were sometimes complementary but also divergent. On the one hand, the concept of perceived risk for the client was central to the decision-making process regarding the type of support needed to maintain the persan at home including technology. On the \nother hand, some of the clients expressed relatively no needs for services as they perceived themselves as functioning well at home while other stakeholders identified important problems. Overall, technology was \nexpected to fulfill two main functions: (1) obtaining additional data to support the decision-making process \nrelated to the type and frequency of support needed to maintain the client at home; and (2) supporting the \nautonomy of the client. In conclusion, these results suggest that the implementation of technology within home \ncare requires merging perspectives from multiple stakeholders to have a common understanding of the needs of the client and identify common objectives regarding the role of technology.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,013 | 0,023 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».