MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099069010 · doi:10.1177/0193945914521903

Alone in Eden

2014· article· en· W2099069010 on OpenAlexaffabout
Elizabeth Andersen, Jude Spiers

Bibliographic record

VenueWestern Journal of Nursing Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusKelowna General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingRestructuringNonprobability samplingTransformational leadershipExperiential learningNursing carePsychologyWork (physics)MedicineBusinessSocial psychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Eden Alternative® is a philosophy of care and transformational model aimed at increasing quality of life for nursing home residents by enhancing institutional environments and restructuring delivery of care. Restructured care consists of three fundamental components: resident care provided primarily by care aides, enhanced responsibilities for care aides, and consistent assignment of residents to care aides. Researchers have focused on resident and family satisfaction with the model, but there is limited research evaluating the impact of the model on nursing home employees. This article is focused on their experiences. Convenience and purposive sampling were used to recruit 22 care aides from five nursing homes in a western Canadian city. Experiential interview data were collected and analyzed utilizing constant comparison to identify common themes. Although care aides initially welcomed the restructuring, they described gradually becoming overwhelmed by the work, confined by consistent assignments, and isolated from colleagues and other residents.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1110.017

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 head0.220
GPT teacher head0.562
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWestern Journal of Nursing ResearchSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207