MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Health promotion for frail older home care clients

2006· article· en· W2046754499 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Wellbeing Research
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Health and Long Term Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingMedicineHealth promotionHealth careEmpowermentPopulationGerontologyPublic healthEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: This paper reports a study evaluating the comparative effects and costs of a proactive nursing health promotion intervention in addition to usual home care for older people compared with usual home care services alone. BACKGROUND: An ageing population, budget constraints and technological advances in many countries have increased the pressure on home care resources. The result is a shift in nursing services from health promotion to meet the more pressing need for postacute care. For frail older people with long-term needs, these changes combine to create a fragmented system of health service delivery, characterized by providing nursing on demand rather than proactively. METHODS: A two-armed, single-blind, randomized controlled trial was carried out with older people > or =75 years and eligible for personal support services through a home care programme in Ontario, Canada. Participants were randomly allocated either to usual home care (control) or to a nursing (experimental) group. In addition to usual home care, the nursing group received a health assessment combined with regular home visits or telephone contacts, health education about management of illness, coordination of community services, and use of empowerment strategies to enhance independence. The data were collected in 2001-2002. RESULTS: Of the 288 older people who were randomly allocated at baseline, 242 (84%) completed the study (120 nursing group; 122 control group). Proactively providing older people with nursing health promotion, compared with providing nursing services on-demand, resulted in better mental health functioning (P = 0.009), a reduction in depression (P = 0.009), and enhanced perceptions of social support (P = 0.009) at no additional cost from a societal perspective. CONCLUSIONS: Home based nursing health promotion, proactively provided to frail older people with chronic health needs, enhances quality of life while not increasing the overall costs of health care. The results underscore the need to re-invest in nursing services for health promotion for older clients receiving home care.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.715

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.442 · 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