Assessment of the SmartJournal Intervention for Improved Oral Care in Nursing Homes: Protocol for a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Poor oral health is common in nursing home residents, and health care professionals report numerous barriers when it comes to the provision of oral care for care-dependent older adults, such as a lack of oral health knowledge and skills, care-resistant behaviors in residents, lack of adequate oral care routines, insufficient systems for documentation of issues related to oral health, a high workload, and unclear responsibilities. An intervention, SmartJournal, has been developed to assist health personnel in preserving older patients' oral health. SmartJournal is a digital tool with three components: (1) documentation of oral hygiene routines; (2) monthly oral health assessment; and (3) education on geriatric oral care. An updated framework for research on complex interventions has been used to guide the various phases in the development of this intervention. This study focuses on the evaluation phase. OBJECTIVE: We aim to assess (1) the effectiveness of SmartJournal use in enhancing nursing home caregivers' capability, opportunity, motivation, and routines related to oral care; and (2) whether SmartJournal use results in improved oral health for nursing home residents. METHODS: We will use a cluster randomized controlled trial to assess impacts of SmartJournal use as specified under study objectives. Nursing homes located in Rogaland, Norway, will be recruited and randomly assigned to an intervention and a control group. The intervention group will be provided with tablets containing SmartJournal and support from research staff, while the control group will continue with existing oral care routines. Both groups will receive oral hygiene packages. The intervention will last for 12 weeks. Measurements will be performed in both groups at baseline, 3 months, and 9 months and include (1) a survey assessing caregivers' capability, opportunity, motivation, and routines related to oral care; and (2) assessment of oral health status in residents using mucosal-plaque score as a primary outcome measure. Analyses will include descriptive statistics and statistical techniques to look for changes and differences in the study variables within and between the intervention and control groups throughout the study period. Associations between study variables will also be investigated. RESULTS: Recruitment of nursing homes for the intervention and control groups was completed in February 2023. Recruitment of individual participants (ie, nursing home residents and caregivers) is ongoing, and baseline measurements are being performed consecutively. Results are expected to be ready for analyses in fall 2024. CONCLUSIONS: We aim to assess the effects of SmartJournal use on oral care and oral health in nursing homes. Results from this work may inform further development and implementation of SmartJournal and similar digital tools aiming to enhance health care services offered to care-dependent people. Finally, SmartJournal may have potential as a learning tool in educational programs for nurses and other health care professionals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05724043; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05724043. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/46926.
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 | 0.036 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.072 | 0.010 |
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".