MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3171991457 · doi:10.1177/23779608211020977

Home-Care Nurses’ Experiences of Caring for Older Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Urinary Incontinence: An Interpretive Description Study

2021· article· en· W3171991457 on OpenAlexaffabout
Melissa Northwood, Jenny Ploeg, Maureen Markle‐Reid, Diana Sherifali

Bibliographic record

VenueSAGE Open Nursing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrinary incontinenceMedicineNursingChronic carePopulationQualitative researchHealth careFamily medicineChronic disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: A third of older adults with diabetes receiving home-care services have daily urinary incontinence. Despite this high prevalence of urinary incontinence, the condition is typically not recognized as a complication and thereby not detected or treated. Diabetes and urinary incontinence in older adults are associated with poorer functional status and lower quality of life. Home-care nurses have the potential to play an important role in supporting older adults in the management of these conditions. However, very little is known about home-care nurses' care of this population. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to explore how nurses care for older home-care clients with diabetes and incontinence. METHODS: This was an interpretive description study informed by a model of clinical complexity, and part of a convergent, mixed methods research study. Fifteen nurse participants were recruited from home-care programs in southern Ontario, Canada to participate in qualitative interviews. An interpretive description analytical process was used that involved constant comparative analysis and attention to commonalities and variance. RESULTS: The experiences of home-care nurses caring for this population is described in three themes and associated subthemes: (a) conducting a comprehensive nursing assessment with client and caregiver, (b) providing holistic treatment for multiple chronic conditions, and (c) collaborating with the interprofessional team. The provision of this care was hampered by a task-focused home-care system, limited opportunities to collaborate and communicate with other health-care providers, and the lack of health-care system integration between home care, primary care, and acute care. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that nursing interventions for older adults with diabetes and incontinence should not only consider disease management of the individual conditions but pay attention to the broader social determinants of health in the context of multiple chronic conditions. Efforts to enhance health-care system integration would facilitate the provision of person-centred home 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAGE Open NursingSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207