Mental health and satisfaction with primary care services in older adults: a study from the patient perspective on four dimensions of care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined the association between mental health and satisfaction with primary care services in community-dwelling older adults. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between mental health in older adults and low satisfaction with primary care services within four dimensions of care. METHODS: This secondary data analysis included 1624 older adults participating in the 'Étude sur la Santé des Aînés Services' (ESA-Services study) and recruited in primary care practices between 2011 and 2013 in the province of Quebec. Patient satisfaction and experience with care were assessed during face-to-face interviews with questions adapted from the Primary Care Assessment Survey. Self-reported mental health indicators included depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, psychological distress and cognition. We conducted four logistic regressions to examine the associations between mental health and low satisfaction in the following dimensions of care: continuity of care, provider-patient interactions, adequacy of care and physical environment. RESULTS: Nearly half of participants (48.5%) reported low satisfaction in at least one dimension of care examined. High psychological distress was associated with low satisfaction with provider-patient interactions [odds ratio (OR) = 1.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.00-1.04] and adequacy of care (OR = 1.04; 95% CI = 1.01-1.06). The presence of an anxiety disorder was associated with low satisfaction in adequacy of care (OR = 1.64; 95% CI = 1.00-2.72). Worse cognitive functioning was associated with low satisfaction in continuity of care, provider-patient interaction and adequacy of care. CONCLUSIONS: Mental health was consistently associated with low satisfaction within dimensions of care. Results support the need for increased attention when delivering care to older adults with mental health problems.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".