Stakeholder Opinions on a Transformational Model of Pain Management in Long-term Care
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pain in older adults with dementia who reside in long-term care (LTC) facilities tends to be undertreated, despite important guidelines designed to ameliorate this problem. A group of public policy and geriatric pain experts recently concluded that existing guidelines are not being implemented because they fail to take into account policy and resource realities. The group published a set of more feasible guidelines that confront these realities (e.g., a recommendation for very brief pain assessments that can be conducted by nursing staff at least weekly). We asked stakeholders to provide opinions on the possibility of implementation of these guidelines within their LTC facilities. Our results support the feasibility of, interest in, and desirability of implementation. They also support an increased role for nurse leadership in LTC pain management. These results could be used to strengthen advocacy efforts for improvement in pain management.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it