Influence of Nutrition and Nonnutrition Factors on Pressure Injury Outcomes Among At-Risk Asian Nursing Home Residents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Given evidence that malnutrition and immobility increase the risk of pressure injuries (PIs) in nursing home (NH) residents and that body mass index guidelines related to undernutrition may differ between Asian and non-Asian populations, the purpose of this study was to describe differences in overall nutrition, dietary intake, and nonnutrition risk factors for PIs between Asian and non-Asian NH residents. DESIGN AND SETTING: Secondary data analysis of a 3-week PI prevention randomized controlled trial in seven Canadian NHs. PATIENTS: Asian (n = 97) and non-Asian (n = 408) residents at moderate or high mobility-related risk of PI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Incident PI by racial subgroups. MAIN RESULTS: Asian residents (PI = 6) consumed significantly smaller meals and marginally different patterns of daily dietary consumption of protein types, liquid supplements, and snacks; took more frequent tub baths; and had marginally lower body mass index than non-Asian residents (PI = 4). CONCLUSIONS: Findings are consistent with earlier research suggesting that nutrition consumption and care patterns may predispose Asian NH residents to develop more PIs than their non-Asian counterparts. Future research should focus on the threshold for and types of nutrition support sufficient to improve nutrition status and reduce PI risk.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".