MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7063160055

Widening the View: A Standardized Approach to Capturing Family Members’ Perspectives on Quality of Life in Long-term Care

2023· dissertation· en· W7063160055 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle Detector Development and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelphi methodLong-term careQuality of life (healthcare)Family memberDelphiFamily healthQuality (philosophy)Activities of daily livingMinimum Data Set
DOInot available

Abstract

Background and Rationale: Family members provide important functional and socio-emotional support to residents living in Long-Term Care (LTC). With high rates of cognitive impairment among residents, family member input is increasingly valued in new LTC standards provided by Health Standards Organization (HSO), given their unique perspectives, knowledge, and role in the resident’s circle of care. A standardized instrument to collect this input is lacking in the current literature.
\nMethods: A scoping review was conducted to gather and evaluate the existing literature studying the instruments used to evaluate family perspectives on Quality of Life (QoL) in LTC. This and retrospective analyses of secondary data collected from 3 previous studies using the interRAI Family QoL LTCF instrument (FamQoL V1), informed the development of a new instrument, the interRAI Family QoL LTCF Version 2 (FamQoL V2). An expert panel participated in the Delphi method to gather expert input into the development of a Version 2 interRAI Family QoL-LTCF (FamQoL V2) Instrument, through the Seniors Quality Leap Initiative (SQLI). Primary data were then collected from 38 LTC homes in Canada and the US with a total of 716 unique family members responding. These data were used to examine the psychometric properties of the instrument, develop summary scales, and examine distributions of Family QoL perspectives in North American LTC homes. 
\nResults: The previously published instruments varied considerably with item counts ranging from 21 to 104 and 4 to 15 summary domains. While several common item themes were identified (e.g., living environment, resident care, autonomy, security, global recommendations), others were less consistent among the instruments (e.g., administration, admission process, therapies). Family members had lower positive response rates on the items with higher missing or non-response rates (e.g., bath/shower when wish, affection and romance, social activities). They scored higher than residents on items related to staff responsiveness and trust and lower than residents on items related to social life and personal control. Several Delphi rounds were conducted to build consensus, resulting in a 25-item FamQoL V2 instrument with 12 shared QoL-LTCF and 13 unique FamQoL V2 items. The instrument had strong performance. Five summary scales were developed through factor analysis, with Cronbach’s alpha ranging from 0.88 to 0.92. 
\nConclusion: This dissertation provides actionable evidence that supports the Quadruple Aim of Healthcare Improvement, meeting new national LTC standards, and assisting LTC homes in their quality improvement efforts. Through an extensive scoping review, analysis of a large and multi-study secondary dataset, expert Delphi input, multi-country primary data collection and psychometric testing, and family member feedback, a FamQoL V2 instrument was developed and accepted by a large consortium of LTC providers and researchers (SQLI). The instrument is operationally feasible, with a shorter number of items compared to other surveys and interoperability with other interRAI instruments. The scientific work underlying this instrument’s development has been reviewed and approved by interRAI’s Instrument and Systems Development (ISD) Committee and the FamQoL V2 is now included in interRAI’s published manual for QoL measures. An evidence-informed, reliable instrument is now available for jurisdictions to standardize how this important perspective is collected and measured in LTC.

Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.

How this classification was reachedexpand

The three-model screen

all 5,600 screened works →

All three models called this out of scope.

stratum: about_only · design weight: 3321.24 (the sample is stratified; any rate computed without the weight is wrong)
Claude Opus 4.8OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: low

Dissertation developing a standardized instrument to capture family members' perspectives on quality of life in long-term care; measurement development for a health-services construct, on the boundary with methods research.

GPT-5.6 (high)OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

It develops and validates a quality-of-life instrument for long-term care, not a research-methods object.

Grok 4.5OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Develops a family quality-of-life instrument for long-term care; health services measurement, not metaresearch.

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)0.153
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.119
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1530.119
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0160.011
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0030.011
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicParticle Detector Development and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207