MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018159969 · doi:10.1177/0733464804271544

Determinants of Neuroleptic Drug Use in Long-Term Facilities for Elderly Persons

2005· article· en· W2018159969 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Voyer, René Verreault, Pamphile Nkogho Mengue, Danielle Laurin, Louis Rochette, Lori Schindel Martin, Lucie Baillargeon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Gerontology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRisperidoneLong-term careHaloperidolAntipsychoticPsychiatryNursing homesLogistic regressionAntipsychotic drugDrugDementiaNursingSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)DiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neuroleptics, also called antipsychotic drugs (e.g., haloperidol, risperidone) are the cornerstone drug therapy for psychiatric disorders. Despite the fact that they are widely used in nursing homes, little is known about their clinical determinants. The goal of this cross-sectional study was to determine the prevalence rate of neuroleptic administration and to identify their determinants among 2,332 elderly residents in nursing homes. Among the residents, 649 (27.8%) had taken at least one neuroleptic drug. According to the logistic regression, the factors associated with neuroleptic drug consumption were younger age, few hours of family visits, severe cognitive impairment, insomnia, physical restraint, and disruptive behavior. In conclusion, neuroleptic drugs are administered to more than a quarter of residents in nursing homes. Alternative solutions to sleep problems and disruptive behaviors of the elderly living in long-term-care facilities should be implemented in order to reduce unnecessary use of neuroleptics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.383
Threshold uncertainty score0.373

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied GerontologySame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207