Caregiver Involvement and Concerns with Care of Residents of Assisted Living before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Family/friend caregivers play an essential role in promoting the physical and mental health of older adults in need of care - especially during the COVID-19 pandemic and especially in assisted living (AL) homes, where resident care needs are similarly complex as in long-term care homes but fewer staffing resources and services are available. However, little research is available on caregiver involvement and concerns with care of AL residents prior to and during waves 1 and 2 of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study addressed this important knowledge gap. METHODS: This prospective cohort study used baseline and follow-up online surveys with primary caregivers to AL residents in Western Canada who were 65 years or older and had lived in the AL home for at least 3 months before Mar 1, 2020. Surveys assessed the following outcomes in the 3 months prior to and during waves 1 and 2 of the pandemic: sociodemographics, 5 ways of visiting or communicating with residents, involvement in 16 care tasks, concerns with 9 resident physical/mental health conditions, perceived lack of resident access to 7 care services, and whether caregivers felt well informed and involved with resident care. RESULTS: Based on 386 caregiver responses, in-person visits dropped significantly in wave 1 of the pandemic and so did caregiver involvement in nearly all care tasks. While these rates increased in wave 2, most did not return to pre-pandemic levels. Correspondingly, caregiver concerns (already high before the pandemic) substantially increased in wave 1 and stayed high in wave 2. These were particularly elevated among caregivers who did not feel well informed/involved with resident care. CONCLUSIONS: Restricted in-person visiting disrupted resident care and was associated with worse perceptions of resident health and well-being. Continued caregiver involvement in resident care and communication with caregivers even during lockdowns is key to mitigating these issues.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".