Social, Physical Environmental and Organizational Factors related to Recreational Activity of Residents with Dementia in Long-Term Care Homes: A Scoping Review Protocol
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction Recreational activity is a rising topic in long-term care settings as it contributes to residents’ physical and emotional wellbeing. As residents’ abilities of sustaining and initiating activities decline, the care environment becomes vital in supporting residents maintain meaningful engagement in activities and life. Understanding how various aspects of the care environment influence residents’ opportunities and quality of recreational activity engagement is a timely and relevant topic in the context of improving quality of life for residents with dementia. The research questions guiding this scoping review are: (1) How do staff characteristics and organisational policies influence residents’ levels of participation in planned and self-directed activities? (2) What is the role of the physical environmental features in common spaces of the care setting in supporting residents’ activity participation? Methods and analysis This review will follow the Arksey and O’Malley scoping review methodology. The search strategy will be applied to five bibliographic and citation databases. Study selection will occur in two steps: first, two reviewers will screen the titles and abstracts of all search results, and second, the first author will independently conduct a full-text review. Data will be extracted from the included studies and analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis. The extracted data will be presented in a narrative format, accompanied by tables that reflect the review’s objectives. Ethics and dissemination Since the methodology of the study involves collecting data from publicly available publications, it does not require ethics approval. The findings will offer valuable insights to inform the design, practice and research of long-term care and recreational activities. The scoping review results will be disseminated through an open-access publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Strengths and Limitations This review offers a targeted view of environmental aspects related to the recreational activity of residents with dementia in long-term care settings. Evidence of both physical and social dimensions of the care environment related to recreational activities will be extracted and summarized. The review takes an inclusive approach to defining activities. Therefore, the findings will synthesize not only environmental factors that impact programmed recreational activities, but also those that encourage or limit opportunities for various kinds of meaningful spontaneous engagement. Being a scoping rather than a systematic review, the quality of the evidence will not be evaluated. The results and recommendations of scoping reviews cannot be graded since methodological appraisal of the quality of included studies will not be conducted. The review will be limited to English language studies. Review will only include studies based in long-term care homes, studies evaluated the recreational activities in adult day care centres, hospitals or other healthcare settings will not be captured.
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 | 0,094 | 0,077 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,014 | 0,012 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,022 | 0,016 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,009 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,042 | 0,009 |
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 ».