Home-care programmes for older adults with disabilities in Canada: How can we assess the adequacy of services provided compared with the needs of users?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The need for home care will probably continue to increase over the next decade as one response to innovative health practices designed to help people receive services at home instead of in institutions. However, there are no data for determining whether home-care programmes can meet user needs. The objectives of the present study were to describe the functional autonomy profile of the users of public home-care programmes in Québec, Canada, and to compare the level of adequacy between required and provided services in public home-care programmes for older adults with disabilities. This study was based on a cross-sectional design from September to December 2002. The population studied consisted of all users of public home-care services in one administrative region in the province of Québec over this 3-month period. Each user was assessed with the Functional Autonomy Measurement System (SMAF) and then classified into one of the 14 Iso-SMAF profiles. The total number of hours of care required was determined using the median number of hours of nursing care, personal care and support services associated with each profile. For the sake of comparison with the services required, the services provided were calculated from an administrative databank that included statistics of the time spent by health professionals on caring for home-care users. The ratio of hours of services provided to the number of hours of services required by home-care users highlights a discrepancy between the services provided and user needs. The results of this study show the feasibility of describing users of public home-care programmes and the adequacy of services provided in relation to user needs. Based on these results, public home-care programmes in the province of Québec appear to be under-funded.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".