[Evaluating the quality of care in nursing homes: comparison of three International models].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this observational descriptive study was to identify the main international models evaluating the quality of nursing homes for non self-sufficient elderly persons, and to apply them in the Italian health system. Firstly, a bibliographic search of institutional websites and Pubmed-Medline was performed to identify the main international models. Secondly, three variables were chosen to evaluate the level of implementability of the models: (1) frequency of use of quality indicators in the international models; (2) degree of constructability of the models in two Italian nursing homes; (3) perceived relevance of the indicators used by the chosen models, by nursing home workers. Thirdly, the chosen models were evaluated. Three international models were identified, respectively used in USA, Canada and Australia. About 80% of the indicators used by the three models were constructable in the two Italian nursing homes that were evaluated. The two nursing homes were "promoted" according to the Canadian model, "better than sufficient" according to the Australian model, but "failed" when US model indicators were applied. The poorest performances in the two Italian nursing homes, with respect to international quality standards, were related to indicators of incontinence, physical restraints (1,1% for USA and 13% for Canada and Australia, versus 55% in one of the nursing homes and 30% in the second home), diagnosis of depressive symptoms, and antipneumococcical vaccination (0% in the two nursing homes, in comparison with the 93,8% in the USA). A low level of performance in prevention and safety matters was identified, while performance was higher for aspects warranted by law. The survey also revealed thatnursing home workers' perceptions of the utility of specific indicators were often based on habit rather than on the actual relevance of care indicators. The development of a model of quality of care that offers a multidimensional evaluation of the level of performance of Italian nursing homes is needed.
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 | 0.033 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".