MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1486398918

E-learning education solutions for caregivers in long-term care (LTC) facilities: new possibilities.

2007· article· en· W1486398918 on OpenAlexaff
CJ MacDonald, Robert Walton

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeglectContext (archaeology)Long-term careMedicineTest (biology)Health careNursingQuality (philosophy)PopulationMedical educationPsychologyEnvironmental health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Online learning (referred to as e-learning throughout this article) has proved to be a useful tool for delivering accessible and convenient education to busy clinical healthcare workers. The ABS Management Company specifically designed a program to provide nurses and caregivers with the necessary knowledge and skills to improve the quality of care and the quality of life for the geriatric population in long-term care (LTC) facilities. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the "Online Solutions: Quality Education for Quality Care in Long-Term Care" program is to use new educational pedagogies and innovative ways to conceptualise and deliver healthcare education to meet the complex issues and concerns of caregivers in LTC facilities. METHODS: During the one-year period that data were collected for this study, 881 caregivers completed the eight (one-hour) modules in the program. Of these, 753 (85%) completed the optional assessment (both the pre and post tests) for one or more of the eight modules. Therefore, of the 881 employees who reviewed all eight modules (881x8 = 7048 modules), 1046 modules (15%) had both pre-post test data upon which to build the analysis. FINDINGS: Information from the evaluation revealed learner improvement in pre-post test scores in excess of 10%, suggesting an increase in new and relevant skills and knowledge related to abuse and neglect, elopement, infection control, nutrition and hydration, pressure ulcers, provision of basic care and restraints. Moreover, the data indicated a reduction in the use of restraints and occurrence of pressure ulcers, suggesting that learners applied new knowledge and skills in the workplace. Finally, staff turnover rates decreased more than 20% suggesting greater job satisfaction after participating in the program. CONCLUSIONS: The research findings point to an urgent and unmet need to provide more accessible just-in-time, just-for-you education programs for caregivers in LTC facilities to ensure quality and efficient services to residents and their families.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes→French-language works237,207→