Quality of Care and Mortality among Long-term Care Residents with Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seniors with dementia who enter long-term care facilities are at greater risk of death than are similar individuals that remain in the community. Previous research has focused primarily on social selection factors such as health status to explain mortality in this population. This study seeks to determine whether resident mortality within 12 months of admission to a facility can be explained by post-admission social causative factors, that is, by institutional quality of care. Logistic regression results are based on the study of 402 residents in 73 long-term care facilities throughout British Columbia, Canada. Mortality data were obtained from Vital Statistics. Although social selection factors (e.g., physical dependency) emerge as the strongest predictors, one social causative factor – facility level restraint use – also predicts mortality. This study provides some evidence that social causative factors play a role in determining mortality among long-term care residents with dementia. Further research on the social causative factors is needed to understand the degree to which they affect mortality, and the way in which they do so.
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 | 0.000 | 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".