MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988483603 · doi:10.1089/jpm.2006.9.1369

Factors Associated with Pressure Ulcers in Palliative Home Care

2006· article· en· W1988483603 on OpenAlexaffabout
Peter Brink, Trevor F. Smith, Barbara Linkewich

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Palliative Medicine · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPressure Ulcer Prevention and Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph's Care GroupNorthern Ontario Academic Medicine AssociationUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePalliative careIntensive care medicineCurative careQuality of life (healthcare)Home healthFamily medicineHealth careNursingSelf care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Studies have identified factors associated with pressure ulcers in many health care settings including acute care, complex continuing care, long-term care, and home care. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with pressure ulcers among palliative home care clients. Identifying associations specific to each setting is important for ulcer prevention and has implications for clients overall well-being and quality of life. METHODS: The study included all palliative home care clients diagnosed with terminal cancer from one palliative home care agency in Ontario. Information on health was gathered using the interRAI instrument for palliative care. RESULTS: The study found male gender, the inability to lie flat because of shortness of breath, catheter, or ostomy care, and a reduced ability to perform activities of daily living to be associated with pressure ulcers. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: In some instances, treatment and prevention of pressure ulcers is the primary goal of care. However, pressure ulcers are also suggestive of deterioration and considered as a part of the disease trajectory. Sometimes the primary goal of care of treatment and prevention is displaced by a greater need for comfort.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Palliative MedicineSame topicPressure Ulcer Prevention and ManagementFrench-language works237,207