MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318670870 · doi:10.3928/00989134-20230106-04

Nursing Care Management of Responsive Behaviors for Persons Living With Dementia in Acute Care Settings: An Integrative Review

2023· review· en· W4318670870 on OpenAlexaff
Sophoeun Soun, Kathleen F. Hunter, Sherry Dahlke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gerontological Nursing · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaNursingAcute careGerontological nursingMedicineMEDLINEGerontologyPsychologyHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current integrative review was performed to understand how acute care nurses manage responsive behaviors among persons living with dementia (PLWD) in acute care settings. Eight studies were included, and three themes were developed: Person-Centered Approach , Non–Person-Centered Approach , and Facilitators and Barriers to Care Approaches . Nurses expressed difficulties in caring for hospitalized PLWD due to lack of knowledge of dementia care, pressure to work more efficiently, and prioritization of acute medical concerns. Nurses frequently used nonpharmacological approaches that required less time spent with patients. Results suggest that nurses in acute care settings require further education regarding dementia and person-centered care approaches for PLWD. Nursing management can support nurses' learning needs through education and policies to improve patient outcomes. [ Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 49 (2), 19–25.]

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.399 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Gerontological NursingSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207