Exploring the Associations Between Patient Affect, Self-Care Actions, and Emergency Department Use for Community-Dwelling Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nurses and other health care providers need to ensure that patients receive care that addresses their specific needs and wants. PURPOSE: This exploratory study examined the associations between patients' self-reported positive and negative affect, the perceived importance of 57 self-care actions, the desire and ability to perform them, and emergency department use in the past 3 months. METHODS: A secondary analysis from a cross-sectional survey project that surveyed 250 community-dwelling adults living in the southern United States, 2015-2016. Independent t tests and the χ test were used. RESULTS: Positive affect was associated with positive perceptions of self-care actions and having no emergency department visit. Patients with a more negative affect perceived finding and using services that support their health behaviors as being important and expressed a desire to participate in local health screening or wellness events. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' perceptions of their self-care actions could lead to better outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".