The Association Between Specific Nurse Case Management Interventions and Elder Health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe the association between specific nursing interventions performed in the context of nurse case management and older people's quality of life and functional ability. DESIGN: Longitudinal. SETTING: Nurse case management through a university hospital and two community health centers. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred seventy-five community-dwelling frail older persons (> or =70 and at risk for repeated hospitalizations). MEASUREMENTS: Specific groups of nursing interventions provided in the context of nurse case management over a 10-month period--coping assistance, lifespan care, risk management, and physical comfort promotion--were focused on. These interventions were recorded using a standardized nursing language. Outcomes were measured using telephone and home interview and medical record review using the 36-item Short Form and the Older American Resources and Services Multidimensional Functional Assessment Questionnaire. RESULTS: Older people receiving coping assistance interventions demonstrated an increase in instrumental activity of daily living functioning although they had lower general health, role-emotional, and mental health scores. CONCLUSION: Coping assistance is one nursing intervention of several provided in the context of nurse case management that is independently associated with improving the functional status of frail older persons even in the presence of declining health normally associated with aging over several months. Examining the relationships between specific nursing activities and health outcomes of frail older persons may be useful in furthering understanding of the results of randomized trials of nurse case management in this population.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".