MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406304784 · doi:10.2147/ppa.s495034

Preferences of Integrated Care and the Influencing Factors Among Chinese Community-Dwelling Older Adults

2025· article· en· W4406304784 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Siqi Liu, Nan Liu, Tingting Qin, Fang Wang

Bibliographic record

VenuePatient Preference and Adherence · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Health Commission of the People's Republic of ChinaChinese Academy of Medical Sciences
KeywordsHealth careMedicineGerontologyQuarter (Canadian coin)Logistic regressionSocial supportPsychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Population aging and epidemiological transition have prompted requests for integrating health and social care. The goal of meeting complex care needs necessitates the understanding of preferred patterns among older adults. The study aimed to elicit the preferred care patterns and the influencing factors of integrated health and social care among community-dwelling older adults in multiple regions of China. Methods: From a national survey, 1184 community-dwelling older adults in three cities across China were included in the study. Individual characteristics and preferred care patterns were measured. Five preferred care patterns were classified, including Home-based health and social care, Community-based health and social care, Home-based health care but community-based social care, Community-based health care but home-based social care, and Institution-based health and social care. Multivariate logistic regression and random forest model were applied to obtain reliable results. Results: Overall, approximately half of the participants (47.7%) in the survey preferred Home-based health and social care and more than a quarter of participants (25.6%) preferred Community-based health and social care, followed by Institution-based health and social care (14.4%). A relatively small fraction of participants reported preferences for Home-based health care but community-based social care (8.0%) and Community-based health care but home-based social care (4.2%). Gender, age, education, living arrangement, resident city, income per month, access to medication, and self-care capability were significantly associated with older adults' preferences (p<0.05 each). Education, living arrangement, age, resident city, and income per month were the most relevant predictors, followed by gender, number of chronic diseases, self-care capability, and access to medication. Conclusion: To effectively meet care needs, efforts should focus on home- and community-based care. Since the preferred care patterns were characterized by obvious variability, policymakers and service providers should carefully consider the differences in making tailored strategies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.270
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePatient Preference and AdherenceSame topicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingFrench-language works237,207