MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799686450 · doi:10.1108/ijhcqa-05-2017-0082

Preventing and managing constipation in older inpatients

2018· article· en· W2799686450 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Nnaemeka Osuafor, Sree Lakshmi Enduluri, Emma Travers, Anne Bennett, Elena Deveney, Shabahat Ali, Frances McCarthy, Chie Wei Fan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal motility and disorders
Canadian institutionsSt Mary's Hospital Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstipationMedicineAuditMultidisciplinary approachIncidence (geometry)RehabilitationIntervention (counseling)Adverse effectQuality managementBowel managementPhysical therapyNursingSurgeryInternal medicineManagement systemOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Constipation in hospitalised older adults leads to adverse events and prolonged stay. The purpose of this paper, therefore, is to effectively prevent and manage constipation in older adults undergoing inpatient rehabilitation using a multidisciplinary war on constipation (WOC) algorithm. Design/methodology/approach A quality improvement project in older adults undergoing rehabilitation for prevention and constipation management was conducted. Quality improvement "plan-do-study-act" cycles included an initial constipation audit in the wards and meetings with the multidisciplinary team (MDT) to develop an algorithm for the preventing, detecting and effectively treating constipation. Findings The project resulted in a 14 per cent reduction in constipation incidence after the newly developed WOC algorithm was introduced. The project also improved communication between patients and the MDT around patients' bowel habits. Practical implications The project shows that using quality improvement methods in rehabilitation settings, earlier detection, earlier intervention and overall reduction in constipation in older adults can be achieved. Originality/value The WOC algorithm has been developed and institutionalised in the current setting. This algorithm may also be applicable in other inpatient settings.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.272

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Health Care Quality AssuranceSame topicGastrointestinal motility and disordersFrench-language works237,207