MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205652156 · doi:10.1177/08404704211040747

Leadership for quality in long-term care

2021· article· en· W3205652156 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ivy Lynn Bourgeault, Tamara Daly, Pat Armstrong, Hugh Armstrong, Susan Braedley

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityYork UniversitySt. Francis Xavier UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersInstitute of AgingCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMichael Smith Health Research BCNova Scotia Health Research FoundationAlzheimer Society
KeywordsLong-term careHealth carePublic relationsEthnographyNursingQuality (philosophy)Term (time)Quality managementPsychologyBusinessSociologyMedicinePolitical scienceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leadership in long-term care is a burgeoning field of research, particularly that which is focused on enabling point of care staff to provide high-quality and responsive healthcare. In this article, we focus on the relatively important role that leadership plays in enabling the conditions for high-quality long-term care. Our methodological approach involved a rapid in-depth ethnography undertaken by an interdisciplinary team across eight public and non-profit long-term care homes in Canada, where we conducted over 1,000 hours of observations and 275 formal and informal interviews with managers, staff, residents, family members and volunteers. Guiding our analysis post hoc is the LEADS in a Caring Environment framework. We mapped key promising leadership practices identified by our analysis and discuss how these can inform the development of leadership standards across staff and management in long-term 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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.538
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management ForumSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207