“I Didn’t Even Make My Bed”: Hospital Relocations and Resident Adjustment in Long-Term Care Over Time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: This prospective longitudinal qualitative study sought to identify the conditions that help or hinder older adults' capacities to adjust to long-term care (LTC) when relocating from hospital. DESIGN AND METHODS: Informed by the principles of constructivist grounded theory, this study employed semi-structured interviews with LTC home residents. Participants were interviewed 4 weeks after their initial relocation, and again every 6 months until they had either resided in their final LTC home for at least 3 months or been enrolled in the study for 2 years. Transcribed interviews were analyzed using the constant comparative method that employs the principle of comparison to guide the analytic process. FINDINGS: A total of nine residents participated in 24 interviews and most had undergone two or more moves. Analysis of the data revealed that multiple forced moves challenged residents' capacities to find home in LTC by contributing to anxiety and uncertainty, hindering resident-staff relations, and interfering with residents' desires to connect with one another. Analysis of the data further revealed that relocation frameworks may require adaptations to more accurately reflect older adults' experiences with relocation from hospital to LTC. IMPLICATIONS: Hospital relocations pose many challenges to residents' capacities to find home in LTC, in part, because they initiate a process of multiple moves. Until the moving process from hospital truly acknowledges and explores residents' preferences, offers choices, and supports joint decision making, it will remain challenging for the LTC home sector to help residents find meaning, purpose, and home in LTC.
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 | 0.000 | 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".