MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Care of older people with dementia in an acute hospital setting

2010· article· en· W2075076335 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

VenueNursing Standard · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Nursing, Elderly Care
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlzheimer Society
KeywordsDementiaFeelingEmpathyNursingAcute careAcute hospitalCognitionNursing carePsychologyMedicineOlder peopleHealth carePsychiatryGerontologyDiseaseSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To investigate the experiences of patients and nursing staff in relation to the care delivered to, and received by, older people with dementia in an acute hospital setting. METHOD: An ethnographic approach was used. Data were collected thorough observation and interviews involving patients and nursing staff. FINDINGS: Care for older people with dementia in acute hospital settings is not always satisfactory. Generally, people with dementia find the delivery of care and the experience of being in hospital distressing. Nurses strive to provide optimum care, but this is not always achievable. Sub-optimal care can be explained by considering the effect of empathy and Bourdieu's theory of practice. CONCLUSION: There is a need to improve current practice when caring for older people with dementia. Approaches to education and practice development need to engage nurses in both cognitive and affective domains, so that nurses gain knowledge and an understanding of patients' feelings and experiences.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.190
Threshold uncertainty score0.857

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.373 · 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