MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909920795 · doi:10.1111/ppc.12341

Late life depression: nursing actions that can help

2018· review· en· W2909920795 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives In Psychiatric Care · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElectroconvulsive Therapy Studies
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLonelinessSuicidal ideationDepression (economics)FeelingQuality of life (healthcare)MedicinePsychiatryElectroconvulsive therapyCognitionLate life depressionCognitive behavioral therapyClinical psychologyPsychologyPsychotherapistSuicide preventionPoison controlMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: This article explains the symptoms of late life depression (LLD) and discusses evidence-informed actions that nurses can implement to provide older adults with the help they need. CONCLUSIONS: Recognizing and addressing depression in older adults can enhance quality of life. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: People with LLD may not appear sad or express feelings of depression. Instead, they demonstrate loss of interest, frailty, cognitive impairment, suicidal ideation, unexplained somatic complaints, and loneliness. Documenting symptoms, screening, and assessing suicidal ideation are essential. Positive outcomes are associated with antidepressant medications, cognitive behavioral therapy, electroconvulsive therapy, neuromodulation therapies, and exercise.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.346 · 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