Homecare safety and medication management: a scoping review of the quantitative and qualitative evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Review question/objective This review will be guided by the following research questions: 1. What are the range of issues encountered by individuals, families, caregivers, and healthcare providers related to the medication management of individuals living in the community and receiving homecare services? 2. What are the documented errors or adverse events that occur in this population that relate to the management of medications? 3. What strategies have been implemented and evaluated that address the issues encountered by this population? Inclusion criteria Types of participants The quantitative component of this review will consider studies that include individuals, mean age 65 years or older, who are receiving homecare services that specifically include medication management. The reason for stipulating mean age as 65 years or older is that this review will be supporting a study focused on this particular age group – hence it is relevant to limit the population to this age range. The search of the literature has not been limited by age and should we find a significant volume of literature addressing the 'young old' i.e., 55-64 years, we will consider changing this criterion to include this additional set. Studies that focus on formal caregivers (licensed or unlicensed) and informal caregivers (family/friends (paid or unpaid)) who are involved in the medication management process will be included. The qualitative component of this review will consider studies that investigate the experience of individuals, mean age 65 years or older, who are receiving homecare services that specifically include medication management. The experience of formal caregivers (licensed or unlicensed) and informal caregivers (family/friends (paid or unpaid)) who are involved in the medication management process will be included. The following topics and settings will not be included in this review: 1) Individuals performing self-care at home but not receiving homecare services. 2) Hospital, Hospital-at-Home, acute care services. 3) Assisted living facilities, long term care, nursing homes 4) Palliative care. 5) Acute exacerbation of chronic illness. 6) Home services for situations not considered ‘a health condition,’ e.g., midwives for home births; respite services; environmental services (maintenance); programs to prevent child abuse; fire TRUNCATED AT 350 WORDS
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".