A randomized controlled trial of the effect of an intensive 1-year care management program on measures of health status in independent, community-living old elderly: the Eldercare project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Primary care practitioners are familiar with the frail elderly and commonly have to deal with their multi-morbidity and their functional decline, both physically and mentally. However, there are well elderly with high quality of life and very few co-morbidities who seldom seek medical care. OBJECTIVE: To determine if a nurse-based program of home-delivered care, linked directly with the primary care practitioner or primary care team, would improve quality of life, symptoms, satisfaction with care and utilization of community and medical services, in independent community living old elderly. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred and thirty-six independent, community-dwelling, cognitively functioning, people aged 80 years and older. INTERVENTION: A nurse-based program of care, carried out in the patients home, that involved a detailed assessment of needs, the development of a plan to meet the needs, and up to eight visits to the patients home during a 1-year period to facilitate the meeting of those needs. CONTROL GROUP: Usual care MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Quality of Life measured using the SF-36 and the CASP-19 scales; symptomology using the Comorbidity Symptom Scale; patient satisfaction using the PSQ-18; and assessment of health care services (community services, emergency room visits, hospitalizations, use of diagnostic services and family doctor visits) through patient recall, family physician chart review and assessment of hospitalization records. RESULTS: There were no statistical or meaningful differences between the intervention and control groups in any of the outcomes measured. CONCLUSION: The intensive, home-delivered, program of care for the well old elderly did not have an impact on the outcomes measured.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".