MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061094456 · doi:10.1016/s0840-4704(10)60154-8

Assessing Satisfaction with Care in Long-Term Care Homes: Current and Best Practices

2006· article· en· W2061094456 on OpenAlexaffabout
Emma J. Stodel, Larry W. Chambers

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsÉlisabeth Bruyère Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLong-term careGovernment (linguistics)Term (time)AccountabilityNursingQuality (philosophy)Patient satisfactionBusinessMedicinePublic relationsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the increased call for accountability and quality of care in long-term care, it is important that government and long-term care provider organizations contemplate resident and family satisfaction with long-term care. This article highlights important considerations and provides practical recommendations for conducting satisfaction surveys in long-term care homes in terms of content, method of implementation and analysis, and use of findings. We conclude by recommending three surveys worthy of consideration by the government and long-term care provider organizations in Canada.

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 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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.268
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.384 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management ForumSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207