MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283276416 · doi:10.2196/34550

Implementing a Personalized Integrated Stepped-Care Method (STIP-Method) to Prevent and Treat Neuropsychiatric Symptoms in Persons With Dementia in Nursing Homes: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study

2022· article· en· W4283276416 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Helma M F Verstraeten, Canan Ziylan, Debby L. Gerritsen, Robbert Huijsman, Miharu Nakanishi, Martin Smalbrugge, Jenny T. van der Steen, Sytse U. Zuidema, Wilco P. Achterberg, T. J. E. M. Bakker

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersZonMw
KeywordsNursingPsychosocialDementiaIntervention (counseling)Psychological interventionParticipatory action researchMedicineFamily caregiversAction planMultidisciplinary approachData collectionPsychologyPsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Neuropsychiatric symptoms occur frequently in many nursing home residents with dementia. Despite the availability of multidisciplinary guidelines, neuropsychiatric symptoms are often inadequately managed. Three proven effective methods for managing neuropsychiatric symptoms were integrated into a single intervention method: the STIP-Method, a personalized integrated stepped-care method to prevent and treat neuropsychiatric symptoms. The STIP-Method comprises 5 phases of clinical reasoning to neuropsychiatric symptoms and 4 stepped-care interventions and is supported with a web application. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify the facilitators and barriers in the implementation of the STIP-Method in nursing homes. METHODS: A mixed methods design within a participatory action research was used to implement the STIP-Method in 4 facilities of 2 Dutch nursing home organizations. In total, we aimed at participation of 160-200 persons with dementia and expected an intervention fidelity of 50% or more, based on earlier studies regarding implementation of effective psychosocial interventions to manage neuropsychiatric symptoms. All involved managers and professionals were trained in the principles of the STIP-Method and in using the web application. An advisory board of professionals, managers, and informal caregivers in each facility supported the implementation during 21 months, including an intermission of 6 months due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In these 6-weekly advisory board meetings, 2 researchers stimulated the members to reflect on progress of the implementation by making use of available data from patient records and the web application. Additionally, the 2 researchers invited the members to suggest how to improve the implementation. Data analysis will involve (1) analysis of facilitators and barriers to the implementation derived from verbatim text reports of advisory board meetings to better understand the implementation process; (2) analysis of patient records in accordance with multidisciplinary guidelines to neuropsychiatric symptoms: personalized, interdisciplinary, and proactive management of neuropsychiatric symptoms; (3) evaluation of the web application in terms of usability scores; (4) pre- and postimplementation analysis of patient records and the web application to evaluate the impact of the STIP-Method, such as changes in neuropsychiatric symptoms and informal caregiver burden. RESULTS: We enrolled 328 persons with dementia. Data collection started in July 2019 and ended in December 2021. The first version of this manuscript was submitted in October 2021. The first results of data analysis are expected to be published in December 2022 and final results in June 2023. CONCLUSIONS: Our study may increase understanding of facilitators and barriers to the prevention and treatment of neuropsychiatric symptoms in nursing home residents with dementia by implementing the integrated STIP-Method. The need for well-designed implementation studies is of importance to provide nursing homes with optimal tools to prevent and treat neuropsychiatric symptoms. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/34550.

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)0.052
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.274

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0520.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.006
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.007

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 head0.523
GPT teacher head0.773
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207