MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2340394255 · doi:10.1097/jnr.0000000000000156

The Revised Index for Social Engagement in Long-Term Care Facilities: A Psychometric Study

2016· article· en· W2340394255 on OpenAlex
Ju Young Yoon, Hongsoo Kim

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

VenueJournal of Nursing Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Aging
FundersNational Research Foundation of Korea
KeywordsCronbach's alphaDiscriminant validityInter-rater reliabilityPsychologyIntraclass correlationLong-term careGerontologyConvergent validityReliability (semiconductor)Clinical psychologyQuality of life (healthcare)Social engagementPsychometricsMedicineInternal consistencyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryRating scale

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Social engagement is known to be an important factor that affects the quality of life and the psychological well-being of residents in long-term care settings. Few studies have examined social engagement in long-term care facilities in non-Western countries. PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the revised index for social engagement (RISE), which was derived from the Korean version of the interRAI Long Term Care Facilities instrument. METHODS: Three hundred fourteen older adults from 10 nursing homes in Korea were included in the study. Convergent and discriminant validities were tested using correlation analysis and t tests, respectively. Factor analysis was adopted to examine the factor structure. The reliability of the RISE was tested using Cronbach's alpha values for internal consistency, and interrater reliability was tested using item kappa values and intraclass correlation coefficients. RESULTS: The RISE showed excellent convergent validity with the average time involved in activities (r = .58). The known-group comparison showed a significant difference in the means of RISE between the group with cognitive impairment and the group without cognitive impairment, indicating satisfactory discriminant validity. Factor analysis showed a good model fit for two factors in the RISE: group involvement and interaction with others. The RISE showed satisfactory internal consistency (α ≥ .70) and adequate interrater reliability (≥.40). CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The RISE is a valid and reliable tool for measuring the social engagement of nursing home residents in Korea. Furthermore, this tool may be a useful instrument for assessing older ethnic Korean residents who reside in nursing homes that are located outside Korea.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.545
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.289
GPT teacher head0.564
Teacher spread0.274 · 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