MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Medical Conditions and Healthcare Utilization among Adults with Intellectual Disabilities Living in Group Homes in New York City

2006· article· en· W2083988413 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Joel M. Levy, Shelly Botuck, Marco R. Damiani, Philip H. Levy, Thomas A. Dern, Stephen E. Freeman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Public Health ServiceAGE-WELL
KeywordsIntellectual disabilityHealth careGroup homeGerontologySample (material)OverweightMedical homeMedicinePsychologyPsychiatryFamily medicineObesityPrimary care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The shift in living situations for adults with intellectual and other developmental disabilities (ID/DD) from family homes to group homes has raised questions about their healthcare needs and access to appropriate healthcare services. This study was undertaken to describe the disability characteristics and medical conditions in a sample of adults living in group homes in order to better understand the relationship of these variables with patterns of healthcare utilization. We examined the demographic and disability characteristics, medical conditions, and healthcare utilization of a group of individuals with ID/DD, living in 2‐ to 14‐bed group homes operated by a large provider, who were accessing their healthcare services from a single medical practice. The data showed that this sample represented a diverse and complex group in terms of functioning, behavioral and medical conditions, presentation of high rates of challenging behaviors, rate of obesity/overweight, and utilization of health care and psychiatric services. The authors concluded that there needs to be a reexamination of the healthcare needs of individuals living in community settings, particularly with regard to the integration of healthcare and psychiatric services.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.205
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.205
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.320 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations10
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual DisabilitiesSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207