MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2588613559 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v7n7p44

Primary care nurses in a local Belgian setting: Responding to healthcare needs of people with disabilities

2017· article· en· W2588613559 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hannelore Storms, Nerée Claes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingMultidisciplinary approachHealth careMedicineMultidisciplinary teamPsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Given the worldwide evolution to deinstitutionalize care for people with a disability (PD), the importance of having care services, for instance as offered by primary care nurses (PCN), to deliver necessary care to PD can only be emphasized. European data (from 2014) show a relatively high percentage of PD in Belgium (16.2%) using home care services provided by primary health care providers (PCN, general practitioners…). Moreover, satisfaction levels regarding these services are among the highest in Europe. The objective of this research was to gain insight into the needs of PD regarding nursing care, based on PCN’s experiences.Methods: Between September and December 2015, a questionnaire – drawn up by a multidisciplinary team (4 general practitioners and 20 PCN) – was distributed electronically to 1547 PCN working in primary care in the Belgian region Limburg. Open-ended questions of this questionnaire were analyzed using techniques developed for qualitative data analysis. PCN were asked to report about (1) mental and behavioural problems, (2) medication policy, (3) swallowing problems, (4) monitoring of nutritional status and (5) any other needs arising in the care for PD.Results: Comments of 588 PCN were generated (response rate of 38%). Besides the (routine) tasks of PCN, the impact of PD’s and informal caregivers’ behaviour on PCN’s working environment were mentioned, particularly regarding medication policy, swallowing problems and nutrional status monitoring. PCN’s collaboration with PD and their informal caregivers is often reported about in relation to respectively PD’s limited ability to communicate or to understand PCN and informal caregivers behaving in a counteracting way, not following through PCN’s advice. Additionally, PCN report about consulting and activating other healthcare professionals in the interest of PD’s. Overall, PCN mentioned tasks in all facets of PD’s lives: from the expected nursing care and far beyond.Conclusions: Besides providing nursing care, PCN are also helping with different tasks related to daily living. This “beyond standard” - care enhances the likelihood of PD to keep on living in their homes for a longer period of time. PCN seem to play a crucial role in activating other healthcare professionals to meet the healthcare needs of PD. More extensive research should be carried out to gain insight in healthcare needs of PD and the challenges PCN come across in their care for this population. Findings can be used to align pre-qualification training and education of (future) PCN with the (unmet) needs of PD.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.384 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice→Same topicChronic Disease Management Strategies→French-language works237,207→