MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3026099269 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v10n8p16

An approach to develop a continuing professional development workshop for nurses to differentiate, delirium, dementia and depression among older adults

2020· article· en· W3026099269 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hala Elansari, Jessie Johnson, Daniel Robert Kelly

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeliriumDementiaDepression (economics)InstitutionalisationMedicineNursingQuality (philosophy)PsychiatryPsychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Delirium, dementia, and depression challenge nurses in acute care settings. They negatively impact older adult's health, well-being, and quality of life. Misdiagnosis of delirium, dementia, and depression is associated with higher mortality rate, functional decline, increased length of stay, higher admission and institutionalization rates, and higher health care expenditures. Nurses in acute care settings have a lack of knowledge about delirium, dementia, and depression. This lack of knowledge could have implication as necessary referrals to physicians is needed in order to ensure initiating of appropriate treatment. Continuing professional development is necessary to keep nurses abreast of the rapid changes in knowledge and technology needed to provide safe and high quality services. Providing an opportunity to participate in continuing professional development on this particular subject would go a long way to facilitate knowledge translation. As a result nurses will be equipped with the adequate knowledge and skills to meet the overall goal of providing quality care for older adults in different care settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0050.013
Research integrity0.0060.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.008

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice→Same topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders→French-language works237,207→