MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Do corporate chains affect quality of care in nursing homes? The role of corporate standardization*

2007· article· en· W2046606011 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

VenueHealth Care Management Review · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStandardizationCertificationNursing homesBusinessQuality (philosophy)Survey data collectionQuality managementMedicineHealth careNursingFamily medicineMarketingManagementPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Chain-owned nursing homes have become the predominant type of provider in the United States, but little is known about their management structures. Prior research has found that chain ownership has significant effects on health outcomes, but why that is the case is not well understood. PURPOSE: This study examines the effects of corporate-mandated standardization and corporate-sponsored training in administrative and clinical processes on the total number of deficiencies reported for a facility and on the percentage of residents with pressure ulcers for chain-owned facilities in Michigan and North Carolina. METHODOLOGY: Data on the corporate practices of standardization and training were collected in a mail survey of facility administrators in Michigan in 2001 and North Carolina in 2002. We received responses from 117 of 239 chain-owned facilities in Michigan and 86 of 270 in North Carolina. Survey responses were merged with facility characteristics taken from the On-line Survey, Certification, and Report System. Seemingly unrelated regression was used to estimate the effects of standardization on the count of health deficiencies and percentage of residents with pressure ulcers simultaneously. FINDINGS: Health deficiencies, but not pressure ulcers, were lower in facilities of chains with greater overall corporate standardization. More detailed analysis revealed that standardization of facilities' physical plant lowered both deficiencies and pressure ulcers and standardization of clinical activities lowered pressure ulcers (but not deficiencies). In contrast, standardization of administrative practices increased pressure ulcers (but not deficiencies). PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Corporate standardization of resident-centered activities such as clinical guidelines and common facility layouts may contribute to superior resident care, whereas primary reliance on administrative standardization may interfere with residents' needs. Chains need to balance administrative efficiency with the local needs of individual chain-owned facilities and their residents.

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)0.005
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.394 · 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