MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003529130 · doi:10.1136/bmj.c1480

Effect of preventive primary care outreach on health related quality of life among older adults at risk of functional decline: randomised controlled trial

2010· article· en· W2003529130 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jenny Ploeg, Kevin Brazil, Brian Hutchison, Janusz Kaczorowski, Dawn M. Dalby, Charlie H. Goldsmith, William Furlong

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonChild and Family Research InstituteWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineReferralConfidence intervalQuality of life (healthcare)OutreachFamily medicineIntervention (counseling)Randomized controlled trialHealth careGerontologyMedical prescriptionNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of a provider initiated primary care outreach intervention compared with usual care among older adults at risk of functional decline. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Patients enrolled with 35 family physicians in five primary care networks in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Patients were eligible if they were 75 years of age or older and were not receiving home care services. Of 3166 potentially eligible patients, 2662 (84%) completed the validated postal questionnaire used to determine risk of functional decline. Of 1724 patients who met the risk criteria, 769 (45%) agreed to participate and 719 were randomised. INTERVENTION: The 12 month intervention, provided by experienced home care nurses in 2004-6, consisted of a comprehensive initial assessment using the resident assessment instrument for home care; collaborative care planning with patients, their families, and family physicians; health promotion; and referral to community health and social support services. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Quality adjusted life years (QALYs), use and costs of health and social services, functional status, self rated health, and mortality. RESULTS: The mean difference in QALYs between intervention and control patients during the study period was not statistically significant (0.017, 95% confidence interval -0.022 to 0.056; P=0.388). The mean difference in overall cost of prescription drugs and services between the intervention and control groups was not statistically significant, (-$C165 ( pound107; euro118; $162), 95% confidence interval -$C16 545 to $C16 214; P=0.984). Changes over 12 months in functional status and self rated health were not significantly different between the intervention and control groups. Ten patients died in each group. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study do not support adoption of this preventive primary care intervention for this target population of high risk older adults. Trial registration Clinical trials NCT00134836.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations56
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207