MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7009552387

The evaluation of a Fall Management Program in a personal care home (PCH) population

2011· dissertation· en· W7009552387 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2011
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicStudy of Mite Species
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth carePopulationOccupational safety and healthHuman factors and ergonomicsInjury preventionSuicide preventionPoison control
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Injurious falls are a common problem among older institutionalized adults, having serious physical, psychological and/or financial consequences for the fallers, their families, and personal care home (PCH) staff (Tideiksaar, 2002). North Eastman Health Association (NEHA) introduced a Fall Management Program into its five PCHs in 2005 in an effort to keep residents active and mobile, while minimizing injuries if they fell. The purpose of this research was to evaluate the Fall Management Program to determine if its goals of increased resident mobility and injury minimization were being met. A quasi-experimental, pre-post, comparison group design triangulating different data sources was used to evaluate the effectiveness of the program. Fall Occurrence Report data were collected from all five NEHA PCHs, and from seven similar PCHs in the Interlake Regional Health Authority (IRHA) that did not have a fall program in place. Administrative data from the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy (MCHP) were also used to provide information about some explanatory variables. Comparisons were made between regional health authorities (RHAs) and over time, from the pre- to post- period. Results indicate that NEHA’s Fall Management Program had some benefits for residents – there was a trend towards an increase in mobility (i.e., a non-significant upward trend in falls) while overall injuries remained stable, and falls resulting in hospitalization decreased significantly. NEHA residents appear to have been protected from an increase in injuries despite an upward trend in falls. Moreover, NEHA’s residents had significantly better outcomes compared to similar residents in the non-program PCHs in IRHA. By the post-period, both RHAs had the same rate of falls, but NEHA had significantly fewer injurious falls and falls resulting in hospitalization than IRHA. This suggests that the non-program PCHs had more difficulty preventing resident injuries than the program PCHs in NEHA.

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)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicStudy of Mite SpeciesFrench-language works237,207