Fall risk factors in long-term care facilities in Ontario
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research was the first large study in Ontario seeking to assess the fall risk factors of longterm care (LTC) residents. Ontario-wide LTC data were provided by the Canadian Institute of \nHealth Information for the period April 2019 through March 2020. Guided by a positivist \nphilosophical orientation, this thesis consolidated existing fall risk factor research using a \nliterature review; developed a concept analysis on the relationship between homeostasis and falls \nin older adults; and conducted a cross-sectional, retrospective research study on falls in Ontario’s \nLTC facilities. The main research question was: What are the factors associated with falls among \nresidents living in Ontario’s LTC facilities? Results showed a significant relationship between \nvariables such as age, sex, diuretic use, visual impairment, dependency in activities of daily \nliving, and cognitive and physical impairments with falls within the previous 30 days. Research \nresults will contribute to the development of more effective falls prevention 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it