Impact of a Geriatric Day Hospital Program on Older Adults’ Functional Independence and Caregiver Stress: A Non-Experimental, Single Group Pre-/Posttest Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the impact of a geriatric day hospital program on older adults’ functional independence and on caregiver stress. Methods: We used a single group pre- and posttest design. The data were collected through chart reviews and follow-up phone calls. Outcomes included fear of falling, balance, functional exercise capacity (walking distance), and caregiver stress. Descriptive statistics were used for sociodemographic data, dependent t test for paired samples of normally distributed data, and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for determining differences between nonnormally distributed data sets. Results: We found a statistically significant difference in pre (33.54) and post (27.47) mean rank scores for fear of falling ( Z = −3.895, P < .001), pre (49.5) and post (59.42) scores for balance ( Z = −8.725, P < .001), and pre (250.07 m) and post (291.20 m) for functional exercise capacity ( P < .001). No statistically significant difference was found with respect to caregiver stress pre (22.05) and post (19.90) scores ( Z = −0.422, P = .673). Discussion: Future research may consider approaching evaluative studies of a similar type using not only quantitative but also qualitative methods to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of older adults’ functional ability and caregiver stress before and after participating in a geriatric day hospital program.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".