MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391480080 · doi:10.1017/s1041610223002466

P66: A systematic review of measures of social connection for people living in long-term care homes

2023· review· en· W4391480080 on OpenAlexaff
Hannah Chapman, Neha Dewan, Jennifer Bethell, Madalena P. Liougas, Gill Livingston, Katherine S. McGilton, Andrew Sommerlad

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Psychogeriatrics · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality of life (healthcare)Construct (python library)Reliability (semiconductor)PsychologySystematic reviewPopulationConstruct validityConnection (principal bundle)Applied psychologyQuality (philosophy)GerontologyMEDLINEMedicinePsychometricsComputer scienceClinical psychologyNursingEnvironmental healthMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background:Social connection is important for health, quality of life and care in long-term care (LTC) homes. However, research on how to improve social connection in LTC has been limited by lack of consensus on best approaches to measurement.Research Objective:We will present a systematic review of measures of social connection developed for use in LTC residents, which aims to identify all existing measures and evaluate their measurement properties including structural validity, internal consistency, reliability and construct validity.Method:We are following Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) systematic review methods. We searched multiple bibliographic databases from inception to November 2021 for studies that were conducted in LTC resident populations, quantified any aspect(s) of social connection, and reported at least one psychometric property for the measure(s) of social connection. We conducted a second targeted search in April 2022 based on our list of identified measures, supplemented with a list of measures used in previous research in this population. We are currently evaluating the measurement properties reported for each identified measure in accordance with COSMIN guidelines.Preliminary results of the ongoing study:We have identified 68 studies reporting on 35 measures used to assess multiple aspects of social connection in LTC homes. The majority (n=25) were measures of quality of life, wellbeing or life satisfaction, which included a social connection subdomain, whilst only 10 measures specifically target social connection. From our pooled evaluation of 20 measures to date, we have found that 20% (n=4) have sufficient evidence of structural validity, 15% (n=3) have sufficient internal consistency, 25% (n=5) have sufficient reliability, and 15% (n=3) have sufficient construct validity.Conclusion:Many measures have been used to assess social connection in LTC settings, but few are specifically designed for this purpose and they often have insufficient evidence for psychometric properties. This review will provide detailed evidence of the quality of these measures to enable future researchers to prioritise higher quality tools and will inform our development of a new person-centred social connection measurement tool for LTC residents in the Social Connection in Long-Term Care Home Residents (SONNET) study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.738

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational PsychogeriatricsSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207