MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400389603 · doi:10.2196/54977

Designing an Intervention to Improve Medication Safety for Nursing Home Residents Based on Experiential Knowledge Related to Patient Safety Culture at the Nursing Home Front Line: Cocreative Process Study

2024· article· en· W4400389603 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marie Haase Juhl, Ann Lykkegaard Soerensen, Henrik Vardinghus‐Nielsen, L Mortensen, Jette Kolding Kristensen, Anne Estrup Olesen

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Safety and Medication Errors
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVelux Fonden
KeywordsNursingFront lineSafety cultureIntervention (counseling)Experiential learningPatient safetyMedicineExperiential knowledgeNursing homesPsychologyPedagogyHealth careManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite years of attention, avoiding medication-related harm remains a global challenge. Nursing homes provide essential health care for frail older individuals, who often experience multiple chronic diseases and polypharmacy, increasing their risk of medication errors. Evidence of effective interventions to improve medication safety in these settings is inconclusive. Focusing on patient safety culture is a potential key to intervention development as it forms the foundation for overall patient safety and is associated with medication errors. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop an intervention to improve medication safety for nursing home residents through a cocreative process guided by integrated knowledge translation and experience-based codesign. METHODS: This study used a cocreative process guided by integrated knowledge translation and experience-based co-design principles. Evidence on patient safety culture was used as an inspirational source for exploration of medication safety. Data collection involved semistructured focus groups to generate experiential knowledge (stage 1) to inform intervention design in a multidisciplinary workshop (stage 2). Research validation engaging different types of research expertise and municipal managerial representatives in finalizing the intervention design was essential. Acceptance of the final intervention for evaluation was aimed for through contextualization focused on partnership with a municipal advisory board. An abductive, rapid qualitative analytical approach to data analysis was chosen using elements from analyzing in the present, addressing the time-dependent, context-bound aspects of the cocreative process. RESULTS: Experiential knowledge was represented by three main themes: (1) closed systems and gaps between functions, (2) resource interpretation and untapped potential, and (3) community of medication safety and surveillance. The main themes informed the design of preliminary intervention components in a multidisciplinary workshop. An intervention design process focused on research validation in addition to contextualization resulted in the Safe Medication in Nursing Home Residents (SAME) intervention covering (1) campaign material visualizing key roles and responsibilities regarding medication for nursing home residents and (2) "Medication safety reflexive spaces" focused on social and health care assistants. CONCLUSIONS: The cocreative process successfully resulted in the multifaceted SAME intervention, grounded in lived experiences shared by some of the most important (but often underrepresented in research) stakeholders: frontline health care professionals and representatives of nursing home residents. This study brought attention toward closed systems related to functions in medication management and surveillance, not only informing the SAME intervention design but as opportunities for further exploration in future research. Evaluation of the intervention is an important next step. Overall, this study represents an important contribution to the complex field of medication safety. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/43538.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.539
Teacher spread0.461 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicPatient Safety and Medication ErrorsFrench-language works237,207