FOOD SERVICES IN LONG-TERM CARE HOMES ARE ASSOCIATED WITH RESIDENTS’ FOOD INTAKE
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Food and nutrient intake of Canadian long-term care residents is commonly inadequate. Factors influencing resident food intake and nutritional quality of menus are numerous and those related to food service are often poorly investigated. Objective: To: a) describe food service characteristics of diverse Canadian long-term care homes, b) determine if there are provincial differences in these characteristics, c) determine the association between these characteristics and food intake of residents, and d) determine the association between these characteristics and the nutritional quality of the menus. Design: A cross-sectional study. Setting: Thirty-two long-term care homes in four Canadian provinces (Alberta, Manitoba, New Brunswick and Ontario). Participants: 639 residents. Measurements: Food service operations were reported by home administrators using a standardized questionnaire and summarized by province for analysis. Resident food intake was assessed by weighing and observing intake over three non-consecutive days including one weekend day. Absolute mean energy and protein intake per resident was used in analyses, as well as the nutritional quality of the diet (iMAR). Menus (regular and pureed) were analyzed for nutrient content and compared to the Dietary Reference Intakes to determine the menu Mean Adequacy Ratio (mMAR), a score that summarizes the nutrient quality. Results: Daily energy and protein intake as well as iMAR were not significantly different across provinces. The timing of the biggest meal of the day, the proportion of commercially prepared food and the mMAR score were the only food service variables significantly different between provinces. Homes who reviewed their menus in the past six months (72%), was positively associated with participant's energy (=23.0; p=0.02) and protein intake (=3.1; p=0.03). Food production system was associated with pureed menu mMAR score (F=5.46; p=0.01). Supper as the biggest meal of the day (67.7 %), was negatively associated with participants' protein intake (=-16.73; p=0.02) while the pureed menu mMAR score was positively associated with the iMAR score (=0.61; p=0.01). Conclusion: To promote sufficient intake, effort is needed to ensure menus meet dietary requirements. Most homes provided the largest meal of the day in the evening and this practice appears to lead to lower protein intake. Relatively few food service variables analysed were associated with resident intake, suggesting that others factors (i.e., resident attributes, mealtime environment, etc.) should also be considered.
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 | 0,004 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 ».