Decreasing Assault Occurrence on a Psychogeriatric Ward
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An agitation management model providing staff education, quantitative assessment of agitation, and emphasized psychosocial interventions was introduced on a geriatric psychiatry ward for male patients. A within-subjects comparison was made of Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI) scores and frequency of committing assault under pre- and post-intervention conditions. Among participants (N = 8) who finished the 72-week study, CMAI scores did not differ significantly under either of the study conditions (p > .05, two-tailed t test). Twenty-nine assaults occurred during the pre-intervention time period and six assaults occurred during the post-intervention time period. According to analysis with the Wilcoxon signed ranks test, the distribution of assaults differed significantly between the two time periods (p < .05, two-tailed). Among individuals who were excluded from the intervention because of lack of consent, assaults increased over the same two time periods. Psychosocial interventions intended to reduce agitation among elderly men with dementia may not necessarily serve to decrease agitation, but may serve to decrease assault occurrence.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".