Функционална автономия в напреднала и старческа възраст– оценяване и планиране на подкрепа и грижи
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the study the issue of functional autonomy in old age is analyzed in terms of recent and significant problems essential for social workers` practice. The emphasis is put on the approaches and tools for assessment of functional status of elderly clients. The main question is how assessment methods can adequately show balance between care needs on one hand and on the other – activity potential and independent living. According to assessment models the purpose is to be pointed out main methodological guidelines, principles and substantive areas of planning in gerontological social work. The implementation of models of support and caregiving plans is grounded – plans which are individually adequate to limitations as well as to the possibilities for clients` functional autonomy. Библиография: Български тълковен речник. – www.t-rechnik.info – Прегледан: 27.02.2013. Димитров, И., А. Капрелян, Б. Иванов, Н. Делева. Оценка на способността за справяне с ежедневните дейности при скрининг и диагноза на леко когнитивно нарушение и деменция. – Известия на Съюза на учените – Варна, Том XVII, 1, 2012. Колева, Н. Социална медицина. С., 2004. Методика на социалните услуги за възрастни хора. Агенция за социално подпомагане, Изх. No.9100–122 от 05.07.2005 г. – www.asp.government.bg – Прегледан: 12.02.2013. Правилник за приложение на закона за социално подпомагане. – ДВ, 63, 2011. Психологический словарь. 2000. – http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/psihologic/2025 – Прегледан: 27.02.2013. Решение No 265 на МС на РБ от 29 април 2011г. За: Разделение на дейностите, финансирани чрез общинските бюджети, на местни и делегирани от държавата дейности и за определяне на стандарти за финансиране на делегираните от държавата дейности през 2012 г. (на основание чл. 8, ал. 2 от Закона за общинските бюджети). Симеонова, Р. Управление на социалната работа като дейност и система. С., 2011. Словарь-справочник по социальной геронтологии. Самара, 2003. Addington, J., H. Saeedi, D. Addington. Influence of social perception and social knowledge on cognitive and social functioning in early psychosis. – British Journal of Psychiatry, 189, 2006. Agich, G. Dependence and autonomy in old age: an ethical framework for long-term care. Cambridge University Press, 2003. Assous, L. Dependance. Soins et aides de longue duree aux personnes agees: une mise en perspective internationale. – Revue francaise des affaires sociales, 2, avril–juin, 2001. Autonomie et dependence. Universite Medicale virtuelle francophone. 2008. – http://umvf.univ-nantes.fr/geriatrie/ – Прегледан: 12.02.2013. Bennett K., A. Stenhoff, J. Pattinson, F. Woods. Well If He Could See Me Now: The Facilitators and Barriers to the Promotion of Instrumental Independence Following Spousal Bereavement. – Journal of Gerontological Social Work, Vol. 53, No. 3, Feb, 2010. Beswick, A., R. Gooberman-Hill, A. Smith, V. Wylde, S. Ebrahim. Maintaining independence in older people. – Reviews in Clinical Gerontology, Vol. 20, Issue 2, May, 2010. Chauffaut, D., E. David. La notion d’autonomie dans le travail social : l’exemple du RMI. – Cahier de recherche, 186, Septembre, 2003. – http://www.credoc.fr/pdf/Rech/C186.pdf – Прегледан: 27.02.2013. Cora, V. L. Elder Health. In: Community health nursing: caring for the public’s health. Ed. by K.S. Lundy and Sh. Janes. Sudbury, 2009. Corpus de Gériatrie. Tome 1. College National des Enseignants Geriatrie (France), Collectif, Ed. 2000. Edelstein, B., N. Staats, K.D. Kalish, L.E. Northrop. Assessment of older adults. In: Psychological Treatment of Older Adults: An Introductory Text. Ed. by M. Hersen and V. B. van Haasselt. N.Y., 1996. Hebert, R. L’evaluation de l’autonomie fonctionnelle des personnes agees. – Canadian family physician, vol. 28, april, 1982. Manoukian, A. Les soignants et les personnes agees. Edition Lamarre, 2007. McDowell, I. Measuring Health: A Guide to Rating Scales and Questionnaires. Third Edition, Oxford University Press, 2006. Morley, J. E. Clinical practice in nirsing homes as a key for progress. – The Journal of Nutrition, Health & Aging, Vol. 14, Number 7, 2010. Pathy’s principles and practice of geriatric medicine. Еd. by A. J. Sinclair, J. E. Morley, B. Vellas. 5th ed., Wiley-Blackwell, 2012. Perrig-Chiello, P., W. J. Perrig, A. Uebelbacher, H. B. Stahelin. Impact of physical and psychological resources on functional autonomy in old age. – Psychology, Health & Medicine, November, 11(4), 2006. Qualls, S., B.Knight. Psychotherapy for depression in older adults. Hoboken, NJ, 2006. Ranjith, G., A. Farmer, P. McGuffi na, A. J. Cleare. Personality as a determinant of social functioning in depression. – Journal of Affective Disorders, 84, 2005. Roeling, M. P. Functioning is the cornerstone of life. Assessing chronic impairment in social functioning. – Journal of European Psychology Students, Vol. 2, 2010. – http://jeps.efpsa.org/ – Прегледан: 27.02.2013. Shrestha, B., S. Sermsri, N. Hongkrailert. Self-effi cacy, family support and physical-social functioning activity among Thai elderly. – Journal of Public Health and Development, Vol. 10, No. 3, September – December, 2012. Use of the international classifi cation of impairments, disabilities and handicaps ICIDH in relation to elderly peoples. Ed. H. Gardent, Coucil of Europe, 1997. Weissman, M., M. Olfson, M. Gameroff, A. Feder, M. Fuentes. A Comparison of Three Scales for Assessing Social Functioning in Primary Care. – American Journal of Psychiatry, 158, 3, March, 2001.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.008 |
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".