MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406324720 · doi:10.3390/nursrep15010020

A Scoping Review of Educational and Training Interventions on Parkinson’s Disease for Staff in Care Home Settings

2025· review· en· W4406324720 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Reports · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsChecklistThematic analysisPsychological interventionMedicineCritical appraisalNursingGrey literatureData extractionInclusion (mineral)Best practiceMedical educationPsychologyMEDLINEQualitative researchAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Parkinson's disease (PD) is a complex neurodegenerative disorder that presents significant challenges for care home residents and staff. This scoping review aimed to synthesize evidence on PD education and training available to care home staff, examine existing programs and their effectiveness, and identify gaps in current educational approaches. METHODS: A scoping review (ScR) was conducted and guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis extension for ScR (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. A comprehensive search of six electronic databases was conducted in September 2024. Studies focusing on PD education and training for care home staff were included. Data extraction and quality appraisal were performed, followed by thematic analysis to identify key patterns and themes. RESULTS: Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. The thematic analysis revealed four main themes: improvements in PD knowledge and confidence, improvements in care practices and outcomes, the need for increased specialist education, and the incorporation of communication training. Educational interventions led to significant improvements in staff knowledge, confidence, and care practices. However, these studies also highlighted a critical need for more specialized PD training among care home staff. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides evidence of promise regarding the potential impact of PD-specific education on care home staff knowledge and practices. Future research should focus on developing and evaluating comprehensive, tailored educational programs to enhance the quality of care for people with PD in care home 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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.516
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.360 · 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