Investigating areas for improvement in the transition from hospital-to-home for frail older adults: A mixed methods study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The planning and execution of discharge plans to successfully transition frail older adults from hospital-to-home can be a complicated endeavour. Objective To identify areas for improvement in the transitional process of frail older adults who were discharged from hospital based, geriatric units to their homes in the community. Method A prospective multi-phased mixed methods design was used, and cross-case thematic analysis of Phase 2 data were triangulated with Phase 1 findings. Results Thematic analysis findings indicated several related areas of importance within the transitional process: 1) Coordination of discharge; 2) Transition-to-home planning; 3) Home and community care; 4) Following of recommendations; and, 5) Medical follow-up. Conclusions Strengthening communication between stakeholders, as well as the implementation of harmonized policies and guidelines are needed to facilitate more consistent care delivery and provide patients and families with information on what to expect during the transitional process.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".