MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032738674 · doi:10.1177/0733464814521319

The Effect of Adult Day Services on Delay to Institutional Placement

2014· article· en· W2032738674 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Gerontology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaFraser Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDay treatmentPsychologyGerontologyMedicineOperations managementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Delays to institutionalization were compared between elderly individuals who differed in the amounts ("dosages") of adult day services (ADS) they attended. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed higher dosages of ADS to be associated with greater delays to institutionalization. Retrospective data from financial and service utilization systems and from the Resident Assessment Instrument for Home Care (RAI-HC) were then used to fit a Cox regression model that was adjusted for potential selection biases. This model also found systematically lower hazards for institutionalization at higher ADS dosages. The ADS effect did not appear to be an artifact of increased utilization of additional home health services. Results suggest a beneficial effect of ADS on delay to institutionalization that cannot be attributed to home support, respite, or case management services.

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.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.268 · 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