MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886235737 · doi:10.1177/1742395318789467

Unmet needs of family caregivers of hospitalized older adults preparing for discharge home

2018· article· en· W2886235737 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jane McCusker, Mark J. Yaffe⃰, Sylvie Lambert, Martín G. Cole, Manon de Raad, Éric Belzile, Antonio Ciampi, Ella Amir, Marcela Hidalgo

Bibliographic record

VenueChronic Illness · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsSt Mary's Hospital CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCaregiver burdenHospital Anxiety and Depression ScaleActivities of daily livingDepression (economics)Needs assessmentGerontologyScale (ratio)Social supportFamily caregiversCLARITYAnxietyFamily medicinePsychiatryPsychologyDementia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives To describe unmet needs of caregivers of hospitalized older adults during the transition from hospital back home, and identify subgroups with different needs. Methods Patients and family caregivers were recruited from an acute care hospital in Montreal, Canada. Measures included Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Zarit burden scale, and Family Inventory of Needs. Dimensions of unmet needs were explored with principal component analysis; regression tree models were used to identify subgroups with different unmet needs. Results A total of 146 patient-caregiver dyads were recruited. Three categories of caregiver unmet needs were identified: patient medical information; role clarity and support; and reassurance. Caregiver subgroups with highest unmet needs were those with high burden of care plus depressive symptoms ( n = 46) and those caring for patients with low IADL scores ( n = 10). Discussion Caregivers with high burden and depression are those with the greatest unmet needs during the care transition.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations27
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChronic IllnessSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207