A Qualitative Study on the Transfer of Residents Between a Nursing Home and an Emergency Department
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nursing home (NH) residents who have exacerbations of chronic health conditions or new illnesses must generally go the emergency department (ED) for health care, later returning to the nursing home when it is felt that they are no longer require acute care. Transfers between settings of care are referred to as transitions, and research has shown that residents are at risk of experiencing negative health outcomes during these periods. This article reports on a qualitative study of resident transfers between one NH and one ED in Canada. Data were collected using interviews, participant observation, and examination of institutional policies and standard practices. Three themes emerged from the data: (1) work of executing transfers; (2) creating and exchanging resident information; and (3) feelings of guilt but not being responsible about how residents' transfers occurred. Although completion of organization-specific forms consumed a considerable amount of practitioners' time, they contributed little to resident transfers or to the sharing of information. There is a need for integrated models of care that transcend settings and promote an understanding of the roles and responsibilities of practitioners working along the entire continuum of care.
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 | 0.015 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".