Safeguarding survival: Older persons with multiple chronic conditions' unplanned readmission experiences: A mixed methods systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to create a holistic understanding of the psychosocial processes of older persons with multiple chronic conditions' experience with unplanned readmission experiences within 30 days of discharge home and identify factors influencing these psychosocial processes. DESIGN: Mixed methods systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Six electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE (R) All 1946-present, Scopus, CINAHL, Embase, PsychINFO and Web of Science). REVIEW METHODS: Peer-reviewed articles published between 2010 and 2021 and addressed study aims (n = 6116) were screened. Studies were categorised by method: qualitative and quantitative. Qualitative data synthesis used a meta-synthesis approach and applied thematic analysis. Quantitative data synthesis used vote counting. Data (qualitative and quantitative) were integrated through aggregation and configuration. RESULTS: Ten articles (n = 5 qualitative; n = 5 quantitative) were included. 'Safeguarding survival' described older persons' unplanned readmission experience. Older persons experienced three psychosocial processes: identifying missing pieces of care, reaching for lifelines and feeling unsafe. Factors influencing these psychosocial processes included chronic conditions and discharge diagnosis, increased assistance with functional needs, lack of discharge planning, lack of support, increased intensity of symptoms and previous hospital readmission experiences. CONCLUSIONS: Older persons felt more unsafe as their symptoms increased in intensity and unmanageability. Unplanned readmission was an action older persons required to safeguard their recovery and survival. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Nurses play a critical role in assessing and addressing factors that influence older persons' unplanned readmission. Identifying older persons' knowledge about chronic conditions, discharge planning, support (caregivers and community services), changes in functional needs, intensity of symptoms and past readmission experiences may prepare older persons to cope with their return home. Focusing on their health-care needs across the continuum of care (community, home and hospital) will mitigate the risks for unplanned readmission within 30 days of discharge. REPORTING METHOD: PRISMA guidelines. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution due to design.
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 | 0.033 | 0.095 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".