MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Staffing levels and expenses in Canadian long-term care facilities by ownership status before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

2025· article· en· W4413107138 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaffingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Pandemic2019-20 coronavirus outbreakTerm (time)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)BusinessLong-term careMedicineMedical emergencyActuarial scienceDemographic economicsNursingEconomicsVirologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Low staffing levels and high turnover rates are longstanding issues in long-term care (LTC) facilities that were further exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Consequently, residents and staff were disproportionately affected, with high morbidity and mortality rates. This study examines changes in staffing levels, overall and by direct care worker category, across the LTC facilities sector by ownership status in Canada before and during the pandemic. It also explores differences in facility expenditures allocated towards employee wages, benefits, and subcontracts across homes by ownership status. Data and methods: Data were from the 2020 and 2021 Nursing and Residential Care Facility Survey, which collected information on facility characteristics, including expenses, revenue, ownership status, and staffing levels. Summary statistics and multivariate linear regression models were used to examine the association between staffing levels and ownership status, with analyses stratified by direct care worker category. Results: On average, public LTC facilities had higher staffing levels and spent a greater proportion of their total costs on employee wages and benefits before and during the pandemic, compared with for-profit and non-profit private facilities. While the total hours of care per resident day (HPRD) increased during the pandemic, there were notable variations by region, ownership status, and direct care worker category. For example, Ontario public nursing homes provided 10% more HPRD from registered nurses during the pandemic, compared with the period before. Interpretation: Staffing levels of direct care workers in LTC facilities, overall and separately, are associated with ownership status. Allocation of employee-related expenses also differed by ownership. Further research is needed to explore interactions between ownership status, staffing levels, and quality of care for 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes→French-language works237,207→