Community-Integrated Intermediary Care (CIIC) Service Model to Enhance Family-Based, Long-Term Care for Older People: Protocol for a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial in Thailand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Thailand is one of the most rapidly aging countries in Asia. Traditional family-based care, which has been the basis of most care for older people, is becoming unsustainable as families become smaller. In addition, women tend to be adversely affected as they still form the bulk of caregivers for older people, and many are likely to exit the labor market in order to provide care. Many family caregivers also have no or minimal training, and they may be called upon to provide quite complex care, increasing the proportion of older people receiving suboptimal care if they rely only on informal care that is provided by families and friends. Facing the increasing burden of noncommunicable diseases and age-related morbidity, Thai communities are increasingly in need of community-integrated care models for older persons that can link existing health systems and reduce the burden upon caring families. This need is common to many countries in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to assess the effectiveness of a community-integrated intermediary care (CIIC) model to enhance family-based care for older people. METHODS: This paper describes a cluster randomized controlled trial comprised of 6 intervention clusters and 6 control clusters that aim to recruit 2000 participants in each arm. This research protocol has been approved by the World Health Organization Ethics Review Committee. The intervention clusters will receive an integrated model of care structured around (1) a community respite service, (2) the strengthening of family care capacity, and (3) an exercise program that aims to prevent entry into long-term care for older people. Control group clusters receive usual care (ie, the current system of long-term care common to all provinces in Thailand), consisting principally of a volunteer-assisted home care service. The trial will be conducted over a period of 2 years. The primary outcome is family caregiver burden measured at a 6-month follow-up, as measured by the Caregiver Burden Inventory. Secondary outcomes consist of biopsychosocial indicators including functional ability, as measured using an activity of daily living scale; depression, as measured by the Geriatric Depression Scale; and quality of life of older people, as measured by the EuroQol 5-dimensions 5-levels scale. Intention-to-treat analysis will be followed. RESULTS: The CIIC facility has been established. Community care prevention programs have been launched at the intervention clusters. Family caregivers are receiving training and assistance. However, the COVID-19 pandemic delayed the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Since ASEAN and many Asian countries share similar traditional family-based, long-term care systems, the proposed CIIC model and the protocol for its implementation and evaluation may benefit other countries wishing to adopt similar community-integrated care models for older people at risk of needing long-term care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Thai Clinical Trials Registry TCTR20190412004; http://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/20196.
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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".