Determinants of Satisfaction With Health Services by Dimensions of Care: An Age-Stratified Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Studies that examined satisfaction with care in older adults are scarce. The aim of this research was to analyse satisfaction among older adults considering mental health, socio-clinical and health system factors and by age category. Data come from the Étude sur la Santé des Aînés Services study including 1,624 adults aged ≥65 years recruited between 2011-2013 in primary care in Quebec. Patient satisfaction was assessed during interviews with questions adapted from the Primary Care Assessment Survey. Mental health (anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, psychological distress, cognition), social support, quality of life, the presence of pain and chronic conditions were self-reported. Health service use was extracted from administrative registries. Logistic regressions stratified by age were used to examine the associations of low satisfaction in three dimensions of care. For continuity of care, the determinants of low satisfaction were pain and attraction index for psychiatric services in adults 65 to 75 years versus anxiety, cognition and hospitalizations in adults 75 years and older. For patient-provider interactions, the determinants were psychological distress, attraction index for psychiatric services in adults 65 to 75 years versus quality of life and cognition in adults 75 years and older. For adequacy of care, anxiety, psychological distress, social support, pain, quality of life and attraction index for psychiatric services were significant in adults 65 to 75 years versus quality of life and cognition in adults 75 years and older. Results highlight different patterns of satisfaction by age category that should be used to improve care delivered in primary care.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".