MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403039542 · doi:10.1186/s12913-024-11549-0

Healthcare system navigation difficulties among informal caregivers of older adults: a logistic regression analysis of social capital, caregiving support and utilization factors

2024· article· en· W4403039542 on OpenAlexaff
Boah Kim, Andrew Wister, Barbara S. Mitchell, Lun Li, Laura Kadowaki

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Health Services Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsMacEwan UniversitySimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial capitalLogistic regressionHealth careSocial supportMedicineCohesion (chemistry)GerontologyNursingPsychologySocial psychologyEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Informal caregivers of older adults play a vital role in improving the degree to which older adults access community and healthcare services in a seamless and timely manner. They are fulfilling important navigation and support roles for their older care recipients. However, there is still little knowledge of the most significant facilitators and barriers to effective and efficient system navigation among caregivers. This paper aims to fill these knowledge gaps through investigation of the key factors (i.e., social capital/cohesion, caregiving supports, and utilization factors) affecting navigation difficulties faced by informal caregivers of older adults. METHODS: The Behavioural-Ecological Framework of Healthcare Access and Navigation (BEAN) model is used to frame the study. Using the General Social Survey on Caregiving and Care Receiving 2018, we analyzed 2,733 informal caregivers whose primary care recipients were aged 65 or older. Hierarchical logistic regression was conducted to identify the relationship between system navigation difficulties among informal caregivers and four sequentially ordered blocks of predictors: (1) sociodemographic (2), social capital/cohesion (3), caregiving supports, and (4) healthcare demand. RESULTS: The fully adjusted model showed that the probability of reporting navigation difficulties was lower for caregivers with social capital/cohesion compared to those without social capital/cohesion. In comparison, the probability of reporting navigation difficulties was higher among caregivers with caregiving support and among caregivers whose care receivers use a higher amount of health service use. Several sociodemographic covariates were also identified. CONCLUSION: Our findings support certain aspects of the BEAN model. This study extends our understanding of potential facilitators and barriers that informal caregivers of older adults face while navigating complex community and health systems. There is a need to implement coordinated schemes and health policies especially for older adults with mental/neurological issues to address the challenges of their caregivers given the specific vulnerability identified in this study. The need for further research using different approaches to examine the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on caregivers' system navigation experience is crucial.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.353 · 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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Health Services ResearchSame topicChronic Disease Management StrategiesFrench-language works237,207