Risks and suggestions to prevent falls in geriatric rehabilitation: a participatory approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to establish the rates and to gather information from patients, staff and family members on risks and potential measures to prevent patient falls on geriatric rehabilitation units in a hospital. METHODS: The falls recorded in the geriatric rehabilitation units between January 2006 and December 2008 were reviewed to establish their rates (falls/1000 patient days) and locations. Twenty-eight interviews with ten patients, twelve staff and six family members were conducted in one of the units. The identified risks and suggestions were organised using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) areas--body function and structure, activity and participation, personal and environmental factors. RESULTS: The rates of falls (mean ± SD) on the two units evaluated were 7 ± 4 and 8 ± 4. The several risks and potential interventions to prevent falls that emerged from the 28 interviews were presented on figures and tables including examples of the participant quotes. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the complexity of the problem and the value of the approach used to increase our understanding of the issues considering the perspectives of patients, staff and family members. The results are being used to construct context-specific interventions to reduce the rates of falls.
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 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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".