MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998837439 · doi:10.1159/000221007

Caregiver Fear of Falling and Functional Ability among Seniors Residing in Long-Term Care Facilities

2009· article· en· W1998837439 on OpenAlexafffund
Theresa Gloria Dever Fitzgerald, Thomas Hadjistavropoulos, Ying C. MacNab

Bibliographic record

VenueGerontology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsChild and Family Research InstituteUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Psychological AssociationChild and Family Research Institute
KeywordsFear of fallingFalling (accident)DeconditioningDementiaLongitudinal studyActivities of daily livingMedicineGerontologyPsychologyInjury preventionPoison controlPhysical therapyPsychiatryDiseaseMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Consistent with fear-avoidance models of falling and pain, past research has demonstrated that, among adults living in the community, excessive fear of falling and fear of pain result in activity restriction and predict functional outcomes including falls (possibly because self-imposed activity restriction, due to fear of pain or falling, can lead to muscular decline and deconditioning). Among seniors with dementia, who rely on others for their care, decisions concerning activity restrictions are made by caregivers. As such, caregivers' fear about the possibility of care recipient falls and pain is important to examine. OBJECTIVE: In this investigation of patients with dementia, our goal was to conduct a longitudinal investigation of the relationship between professional caregivers' fears (about the possibility that care recipients will experience falls and pain) with long-term care (LTC) resident functional ability and falls. METHODS: For the purposes of our 3-month longitudinal study, nurses' and special care aides' fears that specific residents might experience pain and falls were examined. Resident functional ability was assessed, based on an established and well-validated caregiver-administered questionnaire, both before and after the 3-month period. Falls and fall-related injuries sustained by residents were recorded. RESULTS: After controlling for physical risk factors for falling and functional ability at the beginning of the study, caregiver fears that residents might experience pain or falls were found to be predictive of restraint/restriction use. In turn, the use of restraints/restrictions was found to be predictive of future functional ability of residents with dementia (after controlling for functional ability at the beginning of the study) and injurious falls (after controlling for physical risk factors for falling). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to apply a modified fear-avoidance model of falls and pain to seniors with dementia who reside in LTC facilities. Our results demonstrate the importance of considering caregiver fears concerning falls and pain, when developing programs designed to optimize the use of physical restrictions (to prevent falls and minimize functional decline) in LTC facilities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations48
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGerontologySame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207