Promoting the health and social care of older people: gaining a perspective from outside the UK
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With people living longer, getting sicker and entering nursing home care later in their lives, the global trends point to preventing premature institution as a major public health and social care goal. Compared with the UK--Australia, Canada and the USA have a longer track record for introducing government Acts, policies and strategies which contribute to supporting older people in maintaining their health, safety and independence. They also have government Ministers for the Aged. In the UK, it is only very recently that we are witnessing new Government programmes such as the NHS Plan and Modernizing Social Services that begin to demonstrate its more determined approach to improve the life of the older person. An ageing population brings new challenges to policy-makers and planners in the statutory sectors. Various international conferences have been held to address ways in which countries are providing or developing their services, and their research regarding older people. Yet, whatever country one considers, nursing home care continues to give rise to many concerns. Developments in the USA managed care programmes have recently come under even more scrutiny from the Federal and State governments, insurance agencies, nursing home owners and, of course, older people themselves. This article raises issues that still need to be addressed in the UK. It reports briefly on an international conference (attended during the undertaking of a Winston Churchill Fellowship) which had some forward-thinking presentations addressing existing and future care needs of older people. It then concentrates on highlighting some of the current developments in the USA care system that might be learning lessons for UK policy-makers. It concludes with some additional considerations for delivering a National Service Framework for Older People in order that "The needs of older people are at the heart of the reform programme for health and social services."
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 | 0.016 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".