Perceived mental health needs and adequacy of service provision to older people in care homes in the UK: a national survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess perceived need and adequacy of service provision by old age psychiatrists (OAPs) to older people living in care homes in the UK. METHODS: A postal survey of managers of a stratified random sample of 2638 (14% of 18,698) care homes in the UK caring for older residents. Reminders were sent to those not returning the questionnaires. RESULTS: The response rate was 64% (n = 1689). Forty-one percent of care home managers felt that at least 50% of their residents needed psychiatric evaluation. Cognitive impairment, depressive symptoms and challenging behaviour was thought to be present in at least a quarter of residents by 78%, 29% and 17% respectively. Thirty-eight percent of managers reported that their homes 'never' received any visits from OAPs and only a half described the current frequency of visits as adequate. Pharmacological advice was perceived to be adequate by about three-quarters but less than a half perceived non-pharmacological advice as adequate. Eighty percent wanted more input for staff education and training. Perceived need ( p < 0.001), frequency of visits by OAPs ( p = 0.001), availability of geriatrician ( p = 0.001), amount of non-pharmacological advice ( p = 0.014) and direct referral access to OAPs for known patients ( p = 0.036) were found to be independent predictors of perceived inadequacy of service provision by OAPs. CONCLUSION: The survey highlights the perception of unmet need and inadequacy of service provision by OAPs amongst managers of care homes in the UK. The study findings, if confirmed by direct observational studies, may have a considerable impact on already sparse resources with a need to explore efficacy of different models of care in meeting this need.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".