MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883826769 · doi:10.1111/jnu.12414

The Relationships Between the Geriatric Practice Environment, Nursing Practice, and the Quality of Hospitalized Older Adults’ Care

2018· article· en· W2883826769 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mary Fox, Hugh McCague, Souraya Sidani, Jeffrey I. Butler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Scholarship · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFrailty in Older Adults
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityYork University
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareYork University
KeywordsMedicineNursingGeriatricsGeriatric careGerontological nursingClinical PracticeQuality (philosophy)Family medicineCross-sectional studyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To test the relationships between the geriatric practice environment, geriatric nursing practice, and overall quality of care for older adults and their families as reported by nurses working in hospitals, while controlling for nurse and hospital characteristics. DESIGN: A cross-sectional tailored survey design was employed. A questionnaire was mailed to a randomly selected sample of nurses whose primary practice area was medicine, surgery, geriatrics, emergency, or critical care in acute care hospitals in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: Participants (N = 2,005) working in 148 hospitals responded to validated measures of the geriatric practice environment, geriatric nursing practice, overall quality of care for older adults and their families, and nurse and hospital characteristics. The relationships were tested using structural equation modeling. FINDINGS: Controlling for nurse and hospital characteristics, the geriatric practice environment had a statistically significant positive relationship of large magnitude with both geriatric nursing practice (β = 0.52) and overall quality of care (β = 0.92); however, the indirect relationship between the geriatric practice environment and overall quality of care, mediated by geriatric nursing practice, was not significant (β = -0.02). Final model fit was acceptable, with the root mean square error of approximation = 0.07, comparative fit index = 0.93, and Tucker-Lewis Index = 0.87. CONCLUSIONS: A strong geriatric practice environment positively and directly influences geriatric nursing practice and overall quality of care for older adults and their families but does not appear to influence overall quality of care indirectly through geriatric nursing practice. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The results can be used as the basis for promoting practice environments that support overall quality of care and geriatric nursing practice in acute care hospitals.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing ScholarshipSame topicFrailty in Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207