Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40440690›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025

Understanding Gender-Specific Daily Care Preferences: Topic Modeling Study.

Kyungmi Woo, Se Hee Min, Aeri Kim, Subin Choi, Gregory L Alexander, Terrence O'Malley, Maria D Moen, Maxim Topaz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Kyungmi WooCollege of Nursing, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8710-2696
Se Hee MinSchool of Nursing, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2722-6627
Aeri KimThe Research Institute of Nursing Science, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6993-060X
Subin ChoiCollege of Nursing, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-4075-8993
Gregory L AlexanderSchool of Nursing, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4500-8797
Terrence O'MalleyCorresponding Faculty, Harvard University, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7540-8743
Maria D MoenInnovation and External Affairs, MyDirectives Inc, Nashville, TN, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-9984-4582
Maxim TopazSchool of Nursing, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2358-9837

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDaily preferences are a reflection of how adults wish to have their needs and values addressed, contributing to joy and satisfaction in their daily lives. Clinical settings often regard older adults as a uniform group, neglecting the diversity within this population, which results in a shortfall of person-centered care that overlooks their distinct daily care preferences. At the heart of person-centered care lies the imperative to comprehend and integrate these preferences into the care process. Recognizing and addressing gender differences in older adults is critical to customizing care plans, thereby optimizing quality of life and well-being for individuals. This study addresses the need to understand the diverse daily care preferences of adults, particularly among older populations, who represent a growing demographic with unique needs and interests.

objectiveThis study aims to identify and analyze the key themes and daily care preferences from unstructured adult text narratives with a focus on uncovering gender-specific variations.

methodsThis study used 4350 deidentified, unstructured textual data from MyDirectives (MyDirectives, Inc), an interactive online platform. Advanced topic modeling techniques were used to extract meaningful themes, and gender-specific term frequency and distribution were examined to identify gender differences in these elements.

resultsThe study sample included 2883 women (mean age 63.02, SD 13.69 years) and 1467 men (mean age 67.07, SD 11.73 years). Our analysis identified six major themes: (1) "entertainment" (12.14%, 528/4350), (2) "music" (10.39%, 452/4350), (3) "personal interests and memories" (38.18%, 1661/4350), (4) "intimate relationships" (14.92%, 649/4350), (5) "natural comforts" (16.18%, 704/4350), and (6) "emotional, cultural, and spiritual foundations" (8.18%, 356/4350). Gender differences were evident: women were more likely to express preferences for "personal interests and memories" (40.7% vs 33.3%), "natural comforts" (18.4% vs 11.9%), and "emotional and spiritual foundations" (9.3% vs 6.1%) than men. Men expressed stronger preferences for "entertainment" (18.1% vs 9.1%) and "music" (16.8% vs 7.2%). Common terms across all participants included "dog," "love," "friends," and "book." Notably, the study revealed significant gender differences in daily care preferences, especially regarding familial relationships and entertainment choices.

conclusionsThe findings underscore the importance of recognizing individual daily care preferences in person-centered care, particularly regarding gender. Understanding these preferences is crucial for improving care quality and patient satisfaction, thereby enhancing the overall quality of life for adults receiving care across our health care system.

Indexed as

Patient PreferenceAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSex Factorscare preferencedata mininggender differencesKNIMEonline platformpatient-centered carequality of lifetopic modeling

Identifiers

PMID40440690
PMCPMC12163354

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.