Incapacitated and Alone: Prevalence of Unbefriended Residents in Alberta Long-Term Care Homes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of residents who are incapacitated and have no surrogate decision maker, known as the “unbefriended” in Alberta long-term care (LTC) homes. Using cross-sectional online survey methods, data were collected from 123 staff (i.e., directors of care/nursing, administrators) from Alberta LTC homes. Information was collected on survey respondents’ demographic characteristics, number of unbefriended residents, and on organizational characteristics. The overall prevalence of unbefriended residents in LTC homes was 4.14% in Alberta ( SD = 6.28%, range: 0%-34.6%). Homes with the highest prevalence (nearly 15%) of unbefriended residents had >135 beds and were public not-for-profit and located in large urban centers. Fifty-three percent of unbefriended residents were male. The highest prevalence of unbefriended residents lived in homes located in large urban centers and public not-for-profit operators. Population level and LTC home level prevalence data are needed to assess the scope of unmet needs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".