Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
INTRODUCTION: Fragmented demand records, invisible provider capacity, and weak closure verification reduce the responsiveness of home and community-based elderly care. OBJECTIVES: This paper specifies and evaluates a lightweight digital-intelligence workflow system rather than a predictive medical-diagnosis tool. The system links multi-channel demand intake, rule-based priority scoring, provider eligibility filtering, work-order state tracking, delivery verification, exception logging, and feedback closure. The architecture retains a core-provider layer, a beneficiary layer, and a four-module support system, but implements them through minimum data fields, explicit state transitions, and auditable scoring rules. METHODS: An eight-week AB/BA pilot was conducted at two community centers with 42 adults aged 65–82 and 386 valid service requests. RESULTS: Compared with the routine workflow, the supported workflow reduced mean demand-to-confirmation time from 58.4 to 36.9 min and staff coordination time from 8.9 to 6.2 min per request. On-time completion increased from 79.2% to 89.1%, while matching accuracy increased from 83.8% to 91.6%. CONCLUSION: The configuration uses ordinary tablets, office computers, spreadsheet-compatible records, role-based access, and human fallback channels, providing an implementable coordination mechanism for community elderly care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: