MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005185929

OLDER ADULTS’ PERSPECTIVES ABOUT PRIMARY CARE: INFORMING NURSE PRACTITIONER LED PRIMARY CARE

2019· article· en· W3005185929 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rebecca Stanley, Tammy O’Rourke, Sherry Dahlke

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of nursing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimary careThematic analysisNursingFocus groupPrimary health careMedicineDistrict nurseService (business)Qualitative researchHealth careOlder peopleFamily medicinePsychologyGerontologyPopulationSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study describes community dwelling older adults’ experiences in accessing and using primary care services from a spectrum of primary care model. This study reports the findings from one focus group. Older adults shared their past and current experiences with primary care and their opinions to inform the design of a new nurse practitioner led primary care service. Inductive thematic analysis was used to develop themes and subthemes. The themes were: lack of voice and value in primary care; communicating information; and primary care vision of older adults for older adults. Older adults have specific health concerns that are currently not being addressed in primary health care systems. Understanding the experiences of older adults’ utilization of primary care services is an important starting point in changing health systems. The findings from this study could be used to inform the ongoing development for a prototype nurse practitioner primary health care service embedded within a social service organization in Western Canada.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.321
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of nursingSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207