MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4393156213 · doi:10.1101/2024.03.22.24304705

The iCARE feasibility non-experimental design study: An integrated collection of education modules for fall and fracture prevention for healthcare providers in long term care

2024· preprint· en· W4393156213 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Isabel B. Rodrigues, George Ioannidis, Lauren Kane, Loretta M. Hillier, Caitlin McArthur, Jonathan D. Adachi, Lehana Thabane, George Heckman, Jayna Holroyd‐Leduc, Susan Jaglal, Sharon Kaasalainen, Sharon E. Straus, Momina Abbas, Jean‐Éric Tarride, Sharon Marr, John P. Hirdes, Arthur Lau, Andrew P. Costa, Αλεξάνδρα Παπαϊωάννου

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgarySt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonUniversity of TorontoHamilton Health SciencesDalhousie UniversityUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster UniversityResearch Institute for AgingSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersMcMaster UniversityCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAGE-WELLHamilton Health SciencesAmgen
KeywordsTerm (time)Health careFracture (geology)Data collectionFall preventionMedicineMedical emergencyEngineeringInjury preventionPoison controlPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Falls and hip fractures are a major health concern among older adults in long term care (LTC) with almost 50% of residents experiencing a fall annually. Hip fractures are one of the most important and frequent fall-related injuries in LTC. The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility (recruitment rate and adaptations) of implementing the PREVENT (Person-centred Routine Fracture PreEVENTion) model in practice, with a subobjective to understand facilitators and barriers. The model includes a multifactorial intervention on diet, exercise, environmental adaptations, hip protectors, medications (including calcium and vitamin D), and medication reviews to treat residents at high risk of fracture. Our secondary outcomes aimed to assess change in knowledge uptake of the guidelines among healthcare providers and in the proportion of fracture prevention prescriptions post-intervention. We conducted a mixed-methods non-experimental design study in three LTC homes across southern Ontario. A local champion was selected to guide the implementation. We reported recruitment rates using descriptive statistics and adaptations using content analysis. We reported changes in knowledge uptake using the paired sample t-test and the percentage of osteoporosis medications prescriptions using absolute change. Within five months, we recruited three LTC homes. We required two months to identify and train the local champion over three 1.5-hour train-the-trainer sessions, and the champion required three months to deliver the intervention to the healthcare team. We identified several facilitators, barriers, and adaptations. Benefits of the model include easy access to the Fracture Risk Scale, clear and succinct educational material catered to each healthcare professional, and an accredited educational module for physicians and nurses. Challenges included misperceptions between the differences in fall and fracture prevention strategies, fear of perceived side effects associated with fracture prevention medications, and time barriers with completing the audit report. Our study did not increase knowledge uptake of the guidelines, but there was an increase in the proportion of osteoporosis medication post-intervention.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.348 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicChronic Disease Management Strategies→French-language works237,207→