MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3083335178 · doi:10.1111/jan.14480

Family member eating assistance and food intake in long‐term care: A secondary data analysis of the M3 Study

2020· article· en· W3083335178 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sarah Wu, Jill Morrison, Susan E. Slaughter, Laura E. Middleton, Natalie Carrier, Carrie McAiney, Christina Lengyel, Heather Keller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsResearch Institute for AgingUniversity of ManitobaUniversité de MonctonUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlzheimer Society
KeywordsMedicineEnvironmental healthGerontologyLong-term careFood intakeMultilevel modelFamily memberFamily medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To determine if protein and energy intake is significantly associated with a family member providing eating assistance to residents in long-term care homes as compared with staff providing this assistance, when adjusting for other covariates. BACKGROUND: Who provides eating support has the potential to improve resident food intake. Little is known about family eating assistance and if this is associated with resident food intake in long-term care. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, secondary data analysis. METHODS: Between October and January 2016, multilevel data were collected from 32 long-term care homes across four Canadian provinces. Data included 3-day weighed/observed food intake, mealtime observations, physical dining room assessments, health record review, and staff report of care needs. Residents where family provided eating assistance were compared with residents who received staff-only assistance. Regression analysis determined the association of energy and protein intake with family eating assistance versus staff assistance while adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Of those residents who required any physical eating assistance (N = 147), 38% (N = 56) had family assistance during at least one of nine meals observed. Residents who received family assistance (N = 56) and those who did not (N = 91) were statistically different in several of their physiological eating abilities. When adjusting for covariates, family assistance was associated with significantly higher consumption of protein and energy intake. CONCLUSION: Energy and protein intake is significantly higher when family provides eating assistance. Family are encouraged to provide this direct care if it is required. IMPACT: Residents who struggle with independent eating can benefit from dedicated support during mealtimes. Findings from this study provide empirical evidence that family eating assistance is associated with improved resident food intake and provides strong justification to encourage families to be active partners in the care and well-being of their relatives. Home administrators and nursing staff should support the specialized care that families can provide at mealtimes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced NursingSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207