Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although both quality and cost are important concerns for long term care (LTC) facility management and policy, the relationship between cost and quality is poorly understood. Such knowledge is necessary to guide facility management and policy action. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the net effect of quality on cost in LTC hospital settings. STUDY SAMPLE: A 4-year panel dataset from April 1997 through March 2002 comprising observations from 99 LTC hospitals were included in this analysis. METHODS: We examined the relationship between direct resident costs and 7 indicators of quality for long-stay residents. We used panel data methods to control for unobserved facility-level characteristics. RESULTS: We found that increases in restraint use and incident pressure/skin ulcers were associated with lower per diem costs, whereas incontinence prevalence was associated with higher per diem costs. CONCLUSIONS: Our results point to different implications regarding cost and quality for different quality indicators. Although facilities have a strong internal business case to improve quality in incontinence, policy-makers may need to provide financial incentives to encourage reductions in restraint use and incident skin ulcers so as to defray potential higher costs associated with improving quality in these areas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".