Practices countering resident-to-resident aggression and promoting wellness care for older adults in congregate residential facilities: results from a systematic review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resident-to-resident aggression (RRA) is an important issue in congregate residential facilities (CRFs) for older adults and has devastating effects. This study aimed to provide an inventory and content analysis of the practices used to counter RRA and promote wellness care for older adults in CRFs. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, original, peer-reviewed research and systematic reviews published in 14 electronic databases and two gray literature sources were examined. Of the 6196 articles identified, 28 met the inclusion criteria. Practices aimed to prevent, track or intervene in RRA, mostly in long-term care centers, but few were evidence-based and ready for widespread implementation. It emerges that continuous training of staff is necessary and that it should prioritize a person-centered approach. CRFs' managers must promote a culture of wellness care and policymakers should consider the prevention practices to improve the quality of life of older adults in CRFs.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it