The Swedish Municipal Food Distribution Service to the Elderly Living at Home as Experienced by the Recipient’s Relatives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The municipal Food distribution service (FD) to the elderly living at home is a part of the public social and care service in Sweden, The objective of this service is to ensure proper food intake for persons who are unable to do their own shopping, and prepare their own meals. The foremost reasons for the need of the FD service are in situations where there are illness related physical or psychological limitations.This means that the Swedish welfare system takes on the responsibility for its citizens when they have a legal social related need of care. Further, according to the Swedish social legislation, children or other relatives have no legal obligations to take care of their parents or elderly disabled relatives. This also means that the children or relatives of elderly people requiring social support have no legal right to be involved in the evaluation procedure of need assessment or the outcome of any social and care services granted by the Swedish social welfare system. The aim of the present study was to gain insight into how the relatives of elderly people living at home in Sweden experience the municipal service of ready-made meals distributed daily. The data was collected using in-depth interviews with relatives of elderly persons who use the municipal food distribution (FD) service (n=8). The transcribed interview material was analysed using the grounded theory method. The findings of this study revealed that the relatives of the municipal FD service recipients advocate for a food preparation service in the home of the recipient rather than the distribution of ready-made meals from a central kitchen. The results also revealed that the participating relatives felt frustrated by the legal limitations that make it impossible for them to influence the municipal FD service. The findings in this study also indicate that relatives should be considered as a resource in this matter and could actively participate, and have a positive influence on the quality of the municipal FD service for the elderly. The results of the study could have implications for nursing, public administration and gerontology.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".