The Burden Experience of Formal and Informal Caregivers of Older Adults With Hip Fracture in Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The incidence of hip fracture among older adults in Nigeria is on the rise. As a result, there is increased frequency of hospitalization, patient suffering, family burden, and societal cost. One dimension that has not been sufficiently explored is the burden of care experienced by informal and formal caregivers. OBJECTIVES: To describe the care burden experience of informal and formal caregivers for older adults with hip fractures in a specialized orthopedic center in Nigeria and to explore in detail how their experience differs in caregiving roles. METHOD: This study was conducted in the phenomenological approach of qualitative methods. Face-to-face interviews and focus group interaction with 12 family caregivers and 5 health-care professionals were carried out until data saturation was achieved. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The physical, emotional, and general health of elderly hip fracture patients are issues that affect caregiving. Factors that contribute to increased caregivers' burden include system factors (lack of personnel and health-care facilities) and patient factors: comorbidity, patient's cognitive status, and challenges completing activities of daily living (ADL). Social and financial barriers to care contribute to the type of burden experienced by the participants. CONCLUSIONS: Caregivers experience difficulty in helping patients complete their ADL because patients with hip fracture have mobility issues that are often complicated by comorbid physical and cognitive problems. Strategies to reduce caregivers' burden for older adults with hip fracture in Nigeria are needed. Greater access to health-care services and ADL aids, and training of caregivers on how to deal with cognitive and multimorbid health problems are potential solutions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".