Learning disabilities: a survey of community nurses for people with prevalence of challenging behaviour and contact demands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is scant knowledge on the contacts community nurses for people with learning disabilities have with clients who display challenging behaviours, or the numbers of such people on these nurses' caseloads. This study was undertaken in a UK region with a population of 1.68 million people. In this region it is estimated that there are 8500 people with learning disabilities who are in contact with services, this includes around 500 people remaining in hospitals awaiting resettlement. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The research aims were to identify the overall caseload sizes of the nurses, the prevalence of people with learning disabilities who have challenging behaviours on the nurses' caseloads and what contact demands these people required. An additional aim was to discover courses or training that helped the nurses to fulfill their roles. DESIGN AND METHODS: A postal survey was undertaken of the total population of community nurses for people with learning disabilities in the region. The method of data collection was a self-completion questionnaire. RESULTS: The study found that people with challenging behaviours accounted for over a quarter of the combined caseloads, and these clients required the most frequent visits from the nurses. There was a wide range in the number of clients on the caseloads of each nurse but overall these were higher than in other parts of the UK. CONCLUSIONS: It is concluded that community nurses for people with learning disabilities have large caseloads and people with learning disabilities who have challenging behaviours, who account for over one-quarter of the clients they visit, require much more frequent contact visits than other clients. The combination of high numbers of clients (or low numbers of these nurses) may impact on how such nurses are able to perform their role and functions. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: An increase in the numbers of community nurses for people with learning disabilities and skill development in caring for people with challenging behaviours is recommended. If this is not performed the clinical effectiveness of this group of nurses with respect to their work with people who challenge services may be unduly hampered.
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 | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".