Influence of caregivers’ caring ability on subjective well-being of the elderly in nursing home
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To investigate whether the caring ability of caregivers impact the subjective well-being of the elderly in nursing home or not and the influence degree.Methods:A questionnaire survey was conducted among 138 elderly people and corresponding 82 caregivers in 3 nursing homes in Tianjin by Caring Ability Inventory,Memorial University of Newfoundland happiness scale,and Nursing Home Physical Environment Satisfaction Questionnaire.Results:The mean score of caregivers’ caring ability was 205.65±16.28.Elderly subjective well-being score was 32.20±11.11.The influence of the lowest score of caregivers’ caring ability,physical environment and health of elderly on subjective well-being of elderly was significant(P<0.05).Conclusions:The caring ability of caregivers nursing home in Tianjin was at middle level,and the level of elderly’s subjective well-being was at the middle level.The nursing home should further promote the balanced development of caring ability,improve the physical environment and medical service quality,and improve the subjective well-being of the elderly comprehensively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".