ArticleBMJ open quality2019
Health status of care home residents: practicality and construct validity of data collection by staff at scale.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding Pathways into Care-homes using Data (UnPiCD study): a two-part model to estimate inpatient and care-home costs using national linked health and social care data.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Development of a core outcome set for the evaluation of interventions to prevent COVID-19 in care homes (COS-COVID-PCARE Study).BMC geriatrics · 2022Article
- Inter-rater reliability of care home staff's proxy judgements with residents' assessments of their own health-related quality of life: an analysis of the PATCH trial EQ-5D data.Age and ageing · 2021Article
- Comparison of staff and resident health status ratings in care homes.BMJ open quality · 2020Article
- Measure what we want: a taxonomy of short generic person-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs).BMJ open quality · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedical diagnoses and assessed need for care are the prerequisites for planning and delivery of care to residents of care homes. Assessing the effectiveness of care is difficult. The aim of this study was to test the practicality and construct validity of the
methodThe data came from a Bupa Care Homes Census in 2012, which covered 24 506 residents in 395 homes internationally (UK, Australia and New Zealand). Staff completed optical mark readable forms about each resident using a short generic health status measure, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: 19,438 forms were returned (79.3%) in 360 care homes (91.1%); complete health status data were recorded for 18 617 residents (95.8% of those returned). Missing values for any health status items mostly came from a small number of homes. The relationships between
conclusions
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.