Principles of good care for long-term care facilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The International Psychogeriatric Association Task Force on Mental Health Services in Long-Term Care Facilities aims to support and strengthen mental health services in the long-term care sector. The purpose of this paper is to identify broad principles that may underpin the drive towards meeting the mental health needs of residents of long-term care facilities and their families, as well as to enhance the overall delivery of residential care services. METHODS: Principles of good care are extrapolated from an analysis of international consensus documents and existing guidelines and discussed in relation to the research and practice literature. RESULTS: Although the attention to principles is limited, this review reveals an emerging consensus that: (1) residential care should be situated within a continuum of services which are accessible on the basis of need; (2) there should be an explicit focus on quality of care in long-term care facilities; and (3) quality of life for the residents of these facilities should be a primary objective. We take a broad perspective on the challenges associated with actualizing each of these principles, taking into consideration key issues for families, facilities, systems and societies. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations for practice, policy and advocacy to establish an internationally endorsed principles-based framework for the evolution and development of good mental health care within long-term care facilities are provided.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".