The Care-of-the-Elderly Health Guide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The Evidence-Based Care of the Elderly Health Guide is a clinical guide with cross-references for care recommendations. This guide is an innovative adaptation of the Rourke Baby Record to support elderly care. In 2003, the guide was published with an endorsement from the Health Care-of-the-Elderly Committee of the College of Family Physicians of Canada. Since then, physicians have used the guide as a checklist and a monitoring tool for care to elderly patients. OBJECTIVE: We will update the 2003 Care-of-the-Elderly Health Guide with current published evidence-based recommendations. METHODS: This was a mixed methods study consisting of (1) the creation of a list of topics and corresponding guidelines or recommendations, (2) two focus group discussions among family physicians (n = 12) to validate the list for relevance to practice, and (3) a modified Delphi technique in a group of ten experts in Care of the Elderly and geriatrics to attain consensus on whether the guidelines/recommendations represent best practice and be included. RESULTS: The initial list contained 43 topics relevant to family practice, citing 49 published guidelines or recommendations. The focus group participants found the list of topics and guidelines potentially useful in clinical practice and emphasized the need for user-friendliness and clinical applicability. In the first online survey of the modified Delphi technique, 93% (63/66) of the references attained consensus that these represented standards of care. The other references (3/66) attained consensus in the second online survey. The final list contained 47 topics, citing 66 references. CONCLUSION: The Care-of-the-Elderly Health Guide is a quick reference to geriatric care, reviewed for relevance by family physicians and a panel of experts. The Guide is intended to be used in primary care practice.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".