ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
The ecosystem of human capital in care homes.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This qualitative study addresses the essential yet often overlooked experiences of knowledge transfer within care homes (CH). Conducted in a Slovenian CH in 2020 and 2023, participants, including CH management, staff, and residents with their relatives, shared perceptions of knowledge transfer at various levels. The study aims to explore barriers and facilitators for knowledge transfer crucial for creating new knowledge, services, and enhancing care quality for older individuals. Methods: Structured focus group interviews were conducted, and data were collected within the CH. The participants' insights into knowledge transfer were probed, covering various dimensions such as between individuals, groups, organizations, and the community. Transcriptions of recorded interviews were analyzed using content analysis. Results: Knowledge transfer within the CH was facilitated through continuous training, diverse communication channels, and mentoring. Collaboration with relatives improved understanding of resident preferences, habits, and overall enhanced the quality of care. This collaborative effort allowed mutual learning and knowledge transfer from the CH to the broader community. Despite potential benefits, there is an underutilization of information and communication technology, e-care, and untapped potential for partnerships, partly due to the scarcity of care. Barriers were identified in the form of stereotypical attitudes towards aging and care, further reinforced by negative news coverage on older people's care. Conclusion: The multidimensional nature of knowledge in CH centers on resident well-being, emphasizing three key aspects of knowledge transfer: between staff and residents, staff and residents' families, and between the CH and the community. In the context of age management, creating opportunities for knowledge transfer is crucial, emphasizing a transition from traditional institutional care to an approach prioritizing knowledge about quality care. and involving experts from experiences in care process.
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.