Older Adults’ Expectations and Experiences With Health care Professionals in Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By the year 2050, over 6 million of Ghana’s population will be people aged 60 years and above. Because of increased health challenges that accompany aging, older Ghanaians have health needs to address communicable and chronic non-communicable diseases. This suggests that now into the future, older adults in Ghana will have increased contact with health care professionals. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore older adults’ expectations and experiences with health care professionals to generate information that will shape health care policy and service delivery. Interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 23 persons aged 60 years and above from the North and South of Ghana. The transcribed data were imported to NVivo software to aid with analysis of the data. An inductive approach ta data analysis was used, drawing from thematic analyses procedures. Three key findings emerged from the study. These include (a) noncompassionate care—health professionals were neglectful, inattentive, discriminatory, and stigmatizing toward participants; (b) disrespectful attitude—professionals showed disrespect by shouting or yelling, making participants feel invisible, or not distinguishing participants from younger patients; and (c) a better way to treat us—participants called for compassion, patience, respect, honesty, and priority attention from health care professionals. The study contributes to literature on older adults’ experiences with health care professionals and suggests to health policy makers and health care professionals to consider older adults’ care expectations to make health care services elder-friendly.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".