MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195687380 · doi:10.1186/s12877-021-02400-w

Do assisted living facilities that offer a dementia care program differ from those that do not? A population-level cross-sectional study in Ontario, Canada

2021· article· en· W3195687380 on OpenAlexaffabout
Derek R. Manis, Ahmad Rahim, Jeffrey W. Poss, Iwona A. Bielska, Susan E. Bronskill, Jean‐Éric Tarride, Julia Abelson, Andrew P. Costa

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Geriatrics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsResearch Institute for AgingSunnybrook HospitalImpactInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of TorontoUniversity of WaterlooWomen's College HospitalMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaMedicineAssisted livingAssisted Living FacilityGerontologyCross-sectional studyPopulationActivities of daily livingHealth carePoisson regressionFamily medicineNursingEnvironmental healthPsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Many residents of assisted living facilities live with dementia, but little is known about the characteristics of assisted living facilities that provide specialized care for older adults who live with dementia. In this study, we identify the characteristics of assisted living facilities that offer a dementia care program, compared to those that do not offer such a program. METHODS: We conducted a population-level cross-sectional study on all licensed assisted living facilities in Ontario, Canada in 2018 (n = 738). Facility-level characteristics (e.g., resident and suite capacities, etc.) and the provision of the other 12 provincially regulated care services (e.g., pharmacist and medical services, skin and wound care, etc.) attributed to assisted living facilities were examined. Multivariable Poisson regression with robust standard errors was used to model the characteristics of assisted living facilities associated with the provision of a dementia care program. RESULTS: There were 123 assisted living facilities that offered a dementia care program (16.7% versus 83.3% no dementia care). Nearly half of these facilities had a resident capacity exceeding 140 older adults (44.7% versus 21.6% no dementia care) and more than 115 suites (46.3% versus 20.8% no dementia care). All assisted living facilities that offered a dementia care program also offered nursing services, meals, assistance with bathing and hygiene, and administered medications. After adjustment for facility characteristics and other provincially regulated care services, the prevalence of a dementia care program was nearly three times greater in assisted living facilities that offered assistance with feeding (Prevalence Ratio [PR] 2.91, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.98 to 4.29), and almost twice as great among assisted living facilities that offered medical services (PR 1.78, 95% CI 1.00 to 3.17), compared to those that did not. CONCLUSIONS: A dementia care program was more prevalent in assisted living facilities that housed many older adults, had many suites, and offered at least five of the other 12 regulated care services. Our findings deepen the understanding of specialized care for dementia in assisted living facilities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC GeriatricsSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207