Health promotion for frail older home care clients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".