MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408329577 · doi:10.3390/epidemiologia6010014

Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions on COVID-19 in Workers and Residents of Nursing Homes in Geneva: A Mixed Qualitative and Quantitative Study

2025· article· en· W4408329577 on OpenAlexaff
Lakshmi Krishna Menon, Ania Wisniak, Simon Regard, Silvia Stringhini, Idris Guessous, Jean-François Balavoine, Omar Kherad

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiologia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePandemicPsychological interventionCumulative incidenceIncidence (geometry)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)NursingTransmission (telecommunications)Family medicineInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to examine the impact of varying levels of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) on COVID-19 transmission in nursing homes during the first wave of the pandemic. Background/Objectives: The primary aim involved exploring qualitative insights from staff and management regarding the implementation of NPIs. The secondary aim was to determine the cumulative incidence of PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases among residents. Incident rate ratios (IRRs) were the calculated levels of NPI restrictiveness. Methods: We used a mixed methodology to identify factors that might have affected COVID-19 expansion in nursing homes in the canton of Geneva, Switzerland. For the qualitative component, we interviewed the Attending Physicians and/or Director of each nursing home. In the quantitative component, we calculated incident rate ratios (IRRs) for infection between the three levels of COVID-19-related measures taken in these nursing homes, and the cumulative incidence of PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases in their resident population. This study was conducted in 12 nursing homes located in the canton of Geneva, Switzerland, between 1 March 2020, and 1 June 2020. Results: Most nursing homes mandated NPIs for their staff and residents during the first wave of COVID-19. We found an equal distribution of maximally (n = 4), moderately (n = 4), and minimally (n = 4) restrictive NPIs for nursing home workers and residents. The extent of NPIs implemented was not shown to be significantly associated with the cumulative incidence of COVID-19 cases among residents (maximally restrictive IRR = 3.90, 95%CI 0.82–45.54, p = 0.184; moderately restrictive IRR = 3.55, 95%CI 0.75–41.42, p = 0.212; minimally restrictive IRR = reference). Conclusions: Nursing homes in our study showed high variability in which NPIs, and to what extent, they implemented, with no significant relationship between the restrictiveness of NPIs and COVID-19 incidence among nursing home residents. This suggests that other factors influence the transmission of COVID-19 in these settings. Future research should explore additional determinants and the balance between strict NPIs and the overall well-being of residents.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.357
GPT teacher head0.632
Teacher spread0.275 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiologiaSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207