MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164729153 · doi:10.5770/cgj.24.488

Social Connection is Essential in Long-Term Care Homes: Considerations During COVID-19 and Beyond

2021· article· en· W3164729153 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Jennifer Bethell, Hannah M. O’Rourke, Heather Eagleson, Daniel Gaetano, Wayne Hykaway, Carrie McAiney

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geriatrics Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsResearch Institute for AgingUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of WaterlooToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersFaculty of Nursing, University of AlbertaUniversity of AlbertaAlzheimer Society Research ProgramAlzheimer Society
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineDementiaLong-term care2019-20 coronavirus outbreakGerontologySevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Quality of life (healthcare)Term (time)Nursing homesTask (project management)NursingDiseaseVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

COVID-19 has had a profound impact on long-term care (LTC) homes in Canada. But the measures put in place to control infection within LTC homes have also had devastating impacts on the health and well-being of residents through the effects on social connection. Here, we offer guiding principles to enable social connection and promote health and quality of life for LTC residents during COVID-19 and beyond. These principles were generated by a working group of the COVID-19 and Dementia Task Force, convened by the Alzheimer Society of Canada to identify the urgent and emerging issues raised by COVID-19 for Canadians with dementia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.469
Threshold uncertainty score0.932

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0410.031
Scholarly communication0.0160.011
Open science0.0040.018
Research integrity0.0120.025
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations33
Published2021
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geriatrics JournalSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207