Implementing AI-Driven Bed Sensors: Perspectives from Interdisciplinary Teams in Geriatric Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sleep is a crucial aspect of geriatric assessment for hospitalized older adults, and implementing AI-driven technology for sleep monitoring can significantly enhance the rehabilitation process. Sleepsense, an AI-driven sleep-tracking device, provides real-time data and insights, enabling healthcare professionals to tailor interventions and improve sleep quality. This study explores the perspectives of an interdisciplinary hospital team on implementing Sleepsense in geriatric hospital care. Using the Interpretive Descriptive approach, we conducted focus groups with physicians, nurses, care aides, and an activity worker. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) informed our thematic analysis to identify barriers and facilitators to implementation. Among 27 healthcare staff, predominantly female (88.89%) and Asian (74.1%) and mostly aged 30-50 years, themes emerged that Sleepsense is perceived as a timesaving and data-driven tool that enhances patient monitoring and assessment. However, barriers such as resistance to change and concerns about trusting the device for patient comfort and safety were noted, while facilitators included training and staff engagement. The CFIR framework proved useful for analyzing implementation barriers and facilitators, suggesting future research should prioritize effective strategies for interdisciplinary team support to enhance innovation adoption and patient outcomes in rehabilitation settings.
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 | 0.057 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| 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".