Factors Associated With Long-term Institutionalization of Older People With Dementia: Data From the Canadian Study of Health and Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In Canada, half the people with dementia live in institutions. Factors associated with institutionalization should be identified with the goal of implementing strategies not only to permit those with dementia to stay in their homes as long as is feasible but also to ensure that steps are taken for timely institutionalization when appropriate. METHODS: Informal caregivers of 326 individuals with dementia living in the community were identified and interviewed as part of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA). These subjects were contacted again 2.5 and 5 years after the baseline interview to collect information on the status of their care recipients. Survival analyses using clinical data for the individuals with dementia and data from the interviews with their informal caregivers were carried out using Cox proportional hazard modeling to estimate the hazard ratio (HR). RESULTS: Over the 5-year period, 166 individuals with dementia (50.9%) were institutionalized and the median time to admission was 41 months. From the multivariate analysis, the factors significantly associated with institutionalization were: type of dementia (Alzheimer's disease: HR = 1.83), severity of disability (mild: 1.51; moderate: 2.34; total impairment: 4.02), caregiver's age over 60 (1.83), caregiver not a spouse or child (1.55), and severe caregiver burden (1.71). Caregiver's burden was associated with the care-receiver's behavioral disturbance (partial r =.55) and the caregiver's depressive mood (r =.55). CONCLUSIONS: Screening caregivers for burden and depression and designing interventions to decrease the consequences of behavioral disturbance on caregivers would be relevant avenues to explore to decrease institutionalization of people with dementia.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".