The Effect of Dining Room Physical Environmental Renovations on Person-Centered Care Practice and Residents’ Dining Experiences in Long-Term Care Facilities
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study evaluated the effect of dining room physical environmental changes on staff practices and residents' mealtime experiences in two units of a long-term care facility in Edmonton, Canada. Focus groups with staff (n = 12) and individual interviews with unit managers (n = 2) were conducted. We also developed and used the Dining Environment Assessment Protocol (DEAP) to conduct a systematic physical environmental evaluation of the dining rooms. Four themes emerged on the key influences of the renovations: (a) supporting independence and autonomy, (b) creating familiarity and enjoyment, (c) providing a place for social experience, and (d) challenges in supporting change. Feedback from the staff and managers provided evidence on the importance of physical environmental features, as well as the integral nature of the role of the physical environment and organizational support to provide person-centered care for 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it