MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Frequency and type of chronic pain care approaches used for elderly residents in Japan and the factors influencing these approaches

2009· article· en· W2053438666 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJapan Journal of Nursing Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Opioid Use
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRegistered Nurses' Association of Ontario
KeywordsMedicineChronic painRecreationHealth careActive listeningNursingHealthcare servicePain managementPopulationFamily medicinePhysical therapyPsychologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To assess the frequency at which various chronic pain care (CPC) approaches were used while managing older residents of the Health Service Facilities for the Elderly Requiring Care (HSFERC) in Japan and to assess the factors related to nurses and care workers that influence this care. METHODS: A descriptive study design was used. The population comprised 31 nurses, 92 care workers, and 18 residents with chronic pain in eight HSFERC centers located in three provincial cities in Japan. A questionnaire was formulated by using the data collected by a literature review to assess the frequencies at which various CPC approaches were applied and the factors that might influence this care. RESULTS: The most frequently preferred CPC approaches were gentle handling and support while providing daily care, listening attentively, and providing a recreational activity. The factors that affected the provision of CPC were the qualifications, years of experience of aged care, and experience of studying about chronic pain. The nurses tended to have a misconception regarding the manner in which the residents complained of pain and their pain sensitivity. Furthermore, organizational strategies for pain management were not reported by the nurses and care workers. CONCLUSIONS: In order to provide effective and active CPC, ongoing education about pain and cooperation between nurses and care workers to manage residents' pain are highly recommended.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.238 · 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