MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2215752356

Glycemic Control in Long Term Care: Considerations for more Appropriate Individualized Care.

2015· dissertation· en· W2215752356 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Osman Osman

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2015
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlycemicTerm (time)Control (management)MedicineIntensive care medicineLong-term careRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceNursingDiabetes mellitusArtificial intelligenceEndocrinology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diabetes, specifically type 2 diabetes (T2DM), is a metabolic disease that is highly correlated with increasing age. Diabetes is prevalent in about a quarter of residents in LTC, where its management in elderly residents is complicated by the presence of multiple comorbidities, a high level of vulnerability and risk of death. Despite this, evidence for the benefit of tight blood glucose control in preventing cardiovascular and other geriatric outcomes in the frail elderly is inconclusive. Although many clinical practice guidelines (CPG) call for more relaxed blood glucose control in the frail elderly, evidence for relaxed blood glucose targets is mostly based on expert consensus, resulting in variable recommendations among different CPG’s. Furthermore, the current literature suggests that blood glucose values are generally below the recommended lower threshold (an A1C <7.0%) in LTC residents. However, it is not conclusive as to whether lower A1C values are a reflection of the clinical characteristics of the frail elderly in LTC, or a result of stringent blood glucose control. Finally, research in Canada regarding the management of diabetes in LTC homes is greatly lacking. \nThis study conducted a mixed method design (convergent parallel design) in order to explore the current practices, processes, and opinions of blood glucose control in Ontario LTC homes. This study conducted a provincial survey exploring opinions of blood glucose control and treatment among LTC medical directors and attending physicians across Ontario. Alongside the survey, this study also conducted in-depth phone interviews with medical directors, attending physicians, and nurses of varying educational and managerial positions, in order to explore the experiences of managing blood glucose in LTC residents with diabetes. \nThe findings of this study illustrate the growing appreciation of less stringent blood glucose control in elderly LTC residents among LTC physicians and nurses. Frailty, a limited life expectancy and dementia, are common factors that promote less stringent blood glucose control. However, there is still variance in what blood glucose targets physicians are willing to consider. Furthermore, there appears to be two approaches to managing hyperglycemia in LTC. Whereas some physicians are mainly concerned with preventing acute symptoms of hyperglycemia in LTC residents with a less stringent approach, other physicians are of the opinion that hyperglycemia is still related to multiple short term illnesses and complications in LTC residents, and are less willing to consider the more extreme opinions of less stringent control that exist. Barriers to optimal blood glucose control within LTC homes include the presence of dementia and managing a resident’s diet, including unpredictable intake and poor diet choices by the resident or family. Physicians limited their consideration of sliding scale and complex insulin regimens in LTC residents when possible. However, attempts to reduce monitoring parameters was complicated by the presence of unstable blood glucose levels as a result of frailty, dementia, and variable diet intake. The study also identified the role for increased communication between health professionals within LTC and a need for continuing education, especially for the nursing staff, in order to facilitate optimal management. \nFuture research should explore the perceptions and experiences of other key professionals and individuals that are essential to informing the experiences of blood glucose control and overall diabetes management in LTC. Studies should also address the current practices of diabetes management in LTC residents, in order to highlight any potential differences between what physicians and nurses report versus actual practice. Finally, future studies should explore the effect of hyperglycemia on short term complications and geriatric outcomes, in order to better inform management that improves the quality of life of residents.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0060.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207