Effect of an Interdisciplinary Educational Program on Antipsychotic Prescribing Among Residents With Dementia in Two Long-Term Care Centers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of an educational program on antipsychotic prescribing was assessed in two Canadian long-term care centers (LTCC). In each center (Center A residents, n = 258 and Center B residents, n = 191, with dementia at program inception), the rate of change in the odds of using antipsychotics in residents was estimated using mixed-effects logistic regression during a 6-month program period and a 4-month postprogram period, with baseline proportions of use estimated during the 6 months prior to the program. Preprogram proportions of antipsychotic use were 41.6% and 46.2%, respectively. Antipsychotic use decreased during the program in both centers: (odds ratio with 95% CI: 0.943 per week [0.921, 0.965] and 0.969 per week [0.944, 0.994], respectively). During the postprogram period, antipsychotic use increased in Center A (1.039 per week [1.007, 1.072]) but decreased progressively in Center B. The study results suggest the need to implement an ongoing educational program in LTCC.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".