Characteristics of Socially Isolated Residents in Long-Term Care: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To identify socially isolated long-term care residents and to compare their demographic characteristics, functional status, and health conditions to residents who are not isolated. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Resident Assessment Instrument, Minimum Data Set, 2.0 (RAI-MDS) data, from residents in 34 long-term care homes in Alberta, Canada (2008–2018). Using logistic regression, we compared the characteristics, conditions, and functional status of residents who were socially isolated (no contact with family/friends) and non-socially isolated residents. Results: Socially isolated residents were male, younger, and had a longer length of stay in the home, than non-socially isolated residents. Socially isolated residents lacked social engagement and exhibited signs of depression. Discussion: Socially isolated residents had unique care concerns, including psychiatric disorders, and co-morbid conditions. Our approach, using a single item in an existing data source, has the potential to assist clinicians in screening for socially isolated long-term care residents.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".