A National Assessment of Access to Technology Among Nursing Home Residents: A Secondary Analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: According to the National Center for Health Statistics, there are over 1.7 million nursing home residents in the United States. Nursing home residents and their family members have unique needs and stand to benefit from using technology empowering them to be more informed and engaged health care consumers. Although there is growing evidence for benefits of patient-facing technologies like electronic patient portals on patient engagement in acute and outpatient settings, little is known about use of this technology in nursing homes. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to report findings from a secondary analysis of data from a national nursing home study of information technology (IT) adoption, called IT sophistication. We describe the extent to which nursing homes (n=815) allow residents or their representatives to access technology including electronic health records, patient portals, and health information-exchange systems as well as the ability of the residents or representatives to self-report data directly into the electronic health record. METHODS: We used descriptive statistics and regression techniques to explore relationships between information technology adoption (IT sophistication) and residents' or their representatives' access to technology. Covariates of location, bed size, and ownership were added to the model to understand their potential influence on the relationship between IT sophistication and resident access to technology. RESULTS: Findings revealed that resident access to technology was a significant predictor of the nursing home IT sophistication (P<.001). The inclusion of covariates-nursing home location, bed size, and ownership-with their interactions produced a nonsignificant effect in the model. Residents' or their representatives' use of electronic health records and personal health records were both significant predictors of overall IT sophistication (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: As nursing homes continue to progress in technological capabilities, it is important to understand how increasing IT sophistication can be leveraged to create opportunities to engage residents in their care. Understanding the impact of health information technology on outcomes and which technologies make a difference will help nursing home administrators make more informed decisions about adoption and implementation.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».