Public health nursing interventions to promote quality of life in older adult populations:A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review analyzes how nurse-led public health interventions promote quality of life (QoL) among older populations. Using Medline and Cinahl databases, authors completed a systematic review of experimental and quasi-experimental studies published between January 2010 and March 2016 that described interventions used by public health nurses to address health needs of older adult populations. Lawton’s theoretical QoL concepts and the Public Health Intervention Wheel model, which names interventions at the individual, community and systems levels, were used to interpret results. The 23 studies were widely distributed geographically. Four of Lawton’s theoretical QoL domains (Health, Functional Health, Personal Competency, Psychological Well-Being) were addressed in the majority of studies. Although public health nurses used Wheel interventions at all levels of practice, individual level interventions were featured in studies to a greater extent in comparison to community and systems level interventions. Few studies used QoL measures to determine intervention effectiveness. Nurses should consider QoL domains, as they design individual, community, and systems level interventions to improve the health of older adult populations.
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 | 0.005 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".