Assessment of Knowledge and Practices Regarding Elderly Care among Elderly Care Givers at Geriatric Homes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Elderly mainly need to caregivers who should have the chance to perform their practices toward their elderly by professional. Aim: to assess knowledge and practices regarding elderly care among elderly care givers at geriatric homes. Design: descriptive study design. Setting: In geriatric homes at Cairo governorate. Sample: A convenient sample included 60 of elderly caregivers working in the previous mentioned settings. Tool: two tools were used; interview questionnaire form (Appendix I): the questionnaire sheet was designed by the researcher and written in simple Arabic language based on scientific literature review and experts' opinion. It is comprised of two parts. Part I; It was used to assess demographic characteristics of elderly caregivers. Part II; It was used to assess knowledge about elderly care. Observational checklist to assess caregivers’ practices by researcher (Appendix II):it was adopted from Saskatchewan Ministry of Health Home Care Policy Manual (2021) and Rice (1999). The checklist was used to meet the needs of elderly caregivers. Results: show that 71.7% elderly caregivers regarded to gender were female. There were highly statistically significant difference and very highly statistically significant differences between total knowledge and total practices at P-value was (p < 0.01**) and (p < 0.001***) respectively. Conclusion: two fifths of studied sample age was ranged from 41 to less than 50 years old with the mean age was 38.53 ± 9.79. Majority of study sample were females than males, who were in common married. More than half of them were poor in total knowledge about elderly care at geriatric homes. For the total practices of the elderly caregivers toward elderly care at geriatric home, three quarters of the elderly caregivers were not competent. There was a positive correlation between knowledge score with practice score when r = 0.856. Recommendation: Encourage multidisciplinary researches in the same study in order to cover large group of elderly caregivers in different places and effectively address the issue of caregiver´s burden during caring for elderly with chronic illness and problematic behavior.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 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".