International practice settings, interventions and outcomes of nurse practitioners in geriatric care: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To identify and summarize the common clinical settings, interventions, and outcomes of nurse practitioner care specific to older people. DESIGN: Scoping review of the international published and grey literature. DATA SOURCES: A structured literature search was conducted of CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Collaboration and Joanna Briggs Institute databases. REVIEW METHODS: Following the Arksey and O'Malley framework, randomized controlled and quasi-experimental studies of Masters-prepared nurse practitioners providing care for patients over 65 years were included. Studies were reviewed independently by two investigators. Data were extracted, collated by setting, summarized in tables and synthesized for analysis. RESULTS: In total, 56 primary research studies from four countries and 23 systematic reviews were identified. Primary studies were conducted in primary care (n=13), home care (n=14), long-term care (n=10), acute/hospital care (n=9), and transitional care (n=10). Nurse practitioner interventions included substitutive as well as a supplementation NP role elements to meet specific unmet patient care needs. Studies examined six main outcome measures: service utilization (n=41), cost (n=24), length of stay (n=14), health indices (n=44), satisfaction (n=14) and quality of life (n=7). Cumulatively, nurse practitioners demonstrated enhanced results in 83/144 (58%) of outcomes compared to physician-only or usual care. The most commonly measured financial-related outcome was service utilization (n=41) and benefits were frequently reported in home care (8/9, 89%) and long-term care (7/10, 70%) settings. Among patient and care-related outcomes health indices were most frequently measured (n=44). Primary care most frequently reported improved health indices (11/13, 85%). Transitional care reported improved outcomes across all measures, except for service utilization. CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrates improved or non-inferiority results of nurse practitioner care in older people across settings. More well-designed, rigorous studies are needed particularly in relation to costs. The results of this review could be used for future systemic review of effectiveness of NP care specific to older people. Despite the demonstrated NP role value, barriers to implementing the nurse practitioner role persist internationally and more work is needed to develop and promote these roles.
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 | 0.029 | 0.097 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.019 | 0.022 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".