MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4385751742 · doi:10.1111/jgs.18527

Nursing assistants' use of best practices and pain in older adults living in nursing homes

2023· article· en· W4385751742 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Yuting Song, Sascha Bolt, Trina Thorne, Peter Norton, Jeff Poss, Fangfang Fu, Janet E. Squires, Greta G. Cummings, Carole A. Estabrooks

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
FundersMinistry of Health, British Columbia
KeywordsMedicineMinimum Data SetOdds ratioNursingNursing AssistantOddsMultinomial logistic regressionConfidence intervalBest practiceCross-sectional studyFamily medicineNursing homesLogistic regression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Inadequate pain management persists in nursing homes. Nursing assistants provide the most direct care in nursing homes, and significantly improving the quality of care requires their adoption of best care practices informed by the best available evidence. We assessed the association between nursing assistants' use of best practices and residents' pain levels. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of data collected between September 2019 and February 2020 from a stratified random sample of 87 urban nursing homes in western Canada. We linked administrative data (the Resident Assessment Instrument-Minimum Data Set [RAI-MDS], 2.0) for 10,093 residents and survey data for 3547 nursing assistants (response rate: 74.2%) at the care unit level. Outcome of interest was residents' pain level, measured by the pain scale derived from RAI-MDS, 2.0. The exposure variable was nursing assistants' use of best practices, measured with validated self-report scales and aggregated to the unit level. Two-level random-intercept multinomial logistic regression accounted for the clustering effect of residents within care units. Covariates included resident demographics and clinical characteristics and characteristics of nursing assistants, unit, and nursing home. RESULTS: Of the residents, 3305 (30.3%) were identified as having pain. On resident care units with higher levels of best practice use among nursing assistants, residents had 32% higher odds of having mild pain (odds ratio, 1.32; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.71; p = 0.040), compared with residents on care units with lower levels of best practice use among nursing assistants. The care units did not differ in reported moderate or severe pain among residents. CONCLUSIONS: We observed that higher unit-level best practice use among nursing assistants was associated with mild resident pain. This association warrants further research to identify key individual and organizational factors that promote effective pain assessment and management.

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)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Geriatrics Society→Same topicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes→French-language works237,207→