The Experiences of Hospital Admission in a Single Room for Older Persons With Dementia and Their Families: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: When older persons with dementia are admitted to hospital, they often feel disoriented and confused and their cognitive impairment may worsen, purely due to the sudden change in their environment. As such hospital design is recognised as an important aspect in the care and well-being of older persons with dementia. As the number of persons with dementia is increasing, the experience of admission to a hospital with, for example, single rooms is more relevant than ever. AIM AND METHODS: This scoping review aimed to identify, explore and conceptually map the literature reporting on what older people with dementia and their families experienced during admission to a hospital with single room accommodation. We followed the Joanna Briggs Institute recommendations for undertaking a scoping review. In addition, we used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews (PRISMA-ScR) Checklist, which assisted the development and reporting of this scoping review. RESULTS: We included 10 sources within a time frame of 23 years (1998-2021). The sources originate from Europe, Australia and Canada. We identified three conceptual maps: Safety and security, Privacy and dignity and Sensorial stimulation. Our review demonstrates that the themes of the three conceptual maps are experienced as mutually interdependent for the older persons with dementia and their families. CONCLUSION: We conclude that it is not merely the single room design that determines what the older persons with dementia and their families experience as important; the exposure to sensorial stimulation and the presence of well-trained staff taking a dignified patient-centred approach are also crucial for their experience of high-quality nursing care.
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 | 0.019 | 0.091 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".