AGE-RELATED DIFFERENCES IN HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE AMONG WESTERN CANADIAN NURSING HOME RESIDENTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Nursing homes (NHs) typically focus on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among residents aged 65 and over despite approximately 7% of NH residents are younger (aged 18-64). Research suggests that the needs of younger NH residents are not being met and they may have low HRQoL. However, differences in HRQoL of younger and older NH residents may not be apparent in studies that use HRQoL measures designed for research with older NH residents. We hypothesized that the younger residents would have lower HRQoL mean scores than the older (aged ≥ 65) residents using a HRQoL measure based on the HRQoL score derived from Resident Assessment Instrument – Minimum Data Set 2.0 items. The measure uses items that emphasize physical aspects of quality of life rather than social aspects. In a sample of 21,129 residents from 94 NHs in Western Canada, we performed descriptive analyses, t-test, chi-square test, and an adjusted propensity score (PS) analysis through retrospective cohort study from years 2016 to 2017. The HRQoL index score ranged from -.351 to .996 (Mean= 0.693, SD=0.265). In the PS model, the adjusted mean score for younger was higher than for older adults with a mean difference at 0.061 (95% CI 0.031, 0.091) (p<.001). Other domains such as mental health condition of quality of life must be examined in younger NH residents because it is a crucial factor influencing their daily lives, thereby we can explore a more complete set of HRQoL domains of them and redesign care for their unique needs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".