MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7046541650

Describing of issues within long-term care during the covid-19 pandemic: inappropriate antipsychotic use in persons with dementia and future strategies to improve pandemic protocols

2022· other· en· W7046541650 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuee-scholar@UOIT (University of Ontario Institute of Technology) · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaPandemicAntipsychoticPreparednessLong-term careDeliriumMEDLINECoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the COVID-19 pandemic, long-term care (LTC) homes in Ontario were left severely underprepared, and many residents, specifically those with behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD), were contained and sedated using antipsychotics as chemical restraints. LTC homes were understaffed, crowded, did not have proper infection control protocols and overall lacked funding: all of which left them underprepared when faced with the COVID-19 pandemic. These issues became massive problems that led to many resident deaths during COVID-19. Though recommendations were given to help improve the above weaknesses in LTC after the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak of 2002-2004, they were not applied to the LTC sector. This paper will recommend future strategies for Ontario's LTC by analyzing past recommendations and changes made in other countries that saw fewer resident deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, implementing quality improvement (QI) projects to improve weaknesses and test changes on a small scale to measure improvements, and implement policy changes to staffing, crowding, funding, training, and types of therapies given to those with dementia in LTC homes to better pandemic preparedness and decrease the use of antipsychotics as chemical restraints.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuee-scholar@UOIT (University of Ontario Institute of Technology)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207