Risk Factors Associated with Skin Tear Development in the Canadian Long-term Care Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Skin tears (STs) are prevalent wounds found in aging populations and in particular among those living in long-term care (LTC) settings. They are often misunderstood as expected outcomes of aging and as a result are frequently underrecognized and undertreated. Although many factors have been associated with ST development, there is little evidence to corroborate their roles as ST risks. OBJECTIVE: To examine the risk factors associated with ST development in the Ontario LTC population. METHODS: A prospective study design was used to explore the risk factors associated with ST development. A total of 380 individuals 65 years or older from four LTC facilities in Ontario were examined for STs at the beginning of the study and at week 4 to determine if STs had occurred. RESULTS: The study found an ST prevalence of 20.8% and an incidence of 18.9%. History of an ST at baseline (relative ratio [RR], 1.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-2.70; P = .002); the presence of skin changes associated with aging, ecchymosis, and hematomas (RR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.43-1.79; P < .001); chronic disease (RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.03-1.32; P = .018); requiring assistance with activities of daily living (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08-1.18; P < .001); and displaying aggressive behavior (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02-1.10; P = .001) were key risk factors associated with ST development. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide much needed Ontario data on the risk factors associated with ST development and can be used to support prevention programs mitigating ST risk.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".