MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Shaping older adults’ care policy: a scoping review of key determinants in post-acute and community reintegration transitions

2025· other· en· W7084154852 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLiterary and Philosophical Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLHealth carePopulation ageingLong-term careOlder peoplePopulationResource (disambiguation)Transition management (governance)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The aging population is driving an increasing demand for long-term care (LTC) and complex continuing care (CCC) across member countries of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Addressing this growing need requires improved care transition strategies that prioritize directing older adults with less resource-intensive needs toward home care rather than LTC or CCC. Effective implementation of these strategies necessitates that decision-makers have a comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing older adults’ transitions across care settings. Although substantial research has investigated these factors, the current understanding remains fragmented due to the limited synthesis of recent evidence. Objectives This scoping review identifies factors that influence older adults’ transitions across two critical pathways: (1) post-acute care transitions (from acute care to LTC, CCC, and home care) and (2) community reintegration transitions (from LTC and CCC to home care). The findings aim to inform evidence-based integration of these factors into care models and placement decisions. Methods Using Arksey and O’Malley’s five-stage framework, we reviewed English-language publications from OECD countries between 2015 and 2025 across SCOPUS, MEDLINE, OVID EMBASE, CINAHL EBSCO, and Web of Science. Results Our review of 120 publications identified socio-demographic characteristics, caregiver support, health conditions, healthcare system attributes, funding policies, and person-centered care as key determinants of older adults’ transitions. Conclusions Our review underscores the importance of incorporating the identified determinants into care models to address older adults’ individualized needs and support optimal placement decisions. This evidence-based approach can guide policy reforms and management practices, improving resource utilization and system efficiency. Additionally, we outline key gaps in the literature and propose directions for future research.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.522
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.316 · 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