Nigerian healthcare workers’ perception of transdisciplinary approach to older adults’ care: A qualitative case study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction There is a growing interest in collaborative care for older adults in Nigeria; however, little is known about the application of a transdisciplinary approach to care in a typical Nigerian geriatric unit. Therefore, we described healthcare professionals’ (HCPs’) perception of a transdisciplinary approach to older adults’ care in Southern Nigeria. Methods Using Stakian’s approach to a qualitative case study, we purposively invited 16 HCPs working in the geriatric unit of a teaching hospital in Nigeria to a single, in-depth, semi-structured interview. We analysed data using Stakian’s approach of categorical aggregation and direct interpretation. Results Our participants identified five-key features of a transdisciplinary approach to care: consolidated consultation, consolidated care documentation, care files accessibility, shared care decision and a designated care manager. HCPs stated that transdisciplinary approach to care allowed for a consolidated consultation of patients, with all the HCPs (in the same room or via telehealth/telemedicine) and care decisions should be shared between all stakeholders and documented in an accessible unified electronic care document that is managed by a care manager. Factors ranging from lack of consensus on time for a consolidation consultation to inter-professional conflicts were perceived as possible hindrances to a transdisciplinary approach to older adults’ care. Discussion The features of transdisciplinary care described in this study partly aligned with the WHO’s integrated care for older people (ICOPE). Additional components not captured in ICOPE were found. While the description of transdisciplinary was from the perceptive of our study participant, caution should be applied when interpreting these findings.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".