MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2240040005 · doi:10.1177/1054773815601392

Strategies Used by Older Patients to Prevent Functional Decline During Hospitalization

2015· article· en· W2240040005 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Nursing Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionAutonomyMedicineNursing Interventions ClassificationGerontological nursingNursingOlder peopleQualitative researchAcute careGerontologyHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Almost one third of older patients hospitalized for acute care suffer functional decline. Few studies have investigated the point of view of older patients on prevention of this decline. Within the framework of a descriptive qualitative study, the perceptions of 30 hospitalized older adults were collected regarding their personal prevention strategies, the barriers to implementing these, and nursing staff interventions deemed useful. Results show that participants are sensitive to the risk of functional decline and utilize various preventive strategies particularly to maintain their physical abilities, maintain good spirits, keep a clear mind, and foster nutrition and sleep. Their strategies are difficult to implement on account of internal and external barriers. Nursing interventions deemed useful are good relational approach, strong basic care, appropriate assessment, and respect for level of autonomy. The study underscores that older hospitalized patients are applying strategies to prevent functional decline, but some nursing interventions may thwart their efforts.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.804
Threshold uncertainty score0.715

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.221
GPT teacher head0.569
Teacher spread0.348 · 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