The Forensic Mental Health in Community Health (FMHiCH) program was established across five Victorian sites as part of a ten-year mental health reform process. It provides mental and general health care for adults referred from Community Correctional Services who are subject to community-based orders, have a moderate-severity mental health disorder, and present a medium-to-high risk of re-offending. At one of the five sites, exercise physiology and speech pathology were woven into the multidisciplinary team — a deliberate experiment in whether accessible, non-stigmatising services could draw people into care who might otherwise disengage.

The rationale is rooted in the realities of this population. Many adults completing community-based orders experience co-occurring physical health conditions, poor health literacy, and weak connections to mainstream health providers. Recidivism rates in some cohorts reach 43 percent. Engagement in treatment is notoriously fragile, constrained by low motivation, stigma, distrust and structural barriers. The program’s designers reasoned that a gym-based exercise session might feel far less confrontational than a therapy room, particularly for a predominantly male client group, while speech pathology could address the communication difficulties that are disproportionately common among justice-involved people and can quietly undermine their ability to understand and participate in rehabilitation.

To test whether these disciplines were associated with better engagement, the research team led by Frances Shawyer of Monash University conducted a retrospective cohort study using de-identified service data from December 2018 to June 2023. Because the program’s database contained no direct measure of engagement — no ratings of attendance quality, session participation or attitude — the researchers operationalised engagement through two behavioural indicators: whether treatment was completed, and whether treatment goals were achieved or partially achieved. These outcomes reflect sustained involvement in and progress through care, and are consistent with common practice in forensic and mandated-treatment research.

The statistical approach was appropriately rigorous for real-world service data. The team used mixed-effect logistic regression on 1,111 care episodes, accounting for the clustering of episodes within individual clients, and adjusted for a wide range of demographic and socio-economic factors including age, sex, country of birth, marital status, employment, living arrangement, health conditions and area-level socio-economic disadvantage measured by the Index of Relative Socio-Economic Disadvantage. Missing data were handled through multiple imputation by chained equations, generating ten imputed datasets as a sensitivity analysis.

The results were striking. In minimally adjusted models, exercise physiology involvement was associated with roughly five to six times higher odds of treatment completion (odds ratio 5.65, 95 percent confidence interval 2.41 to 13.23) and goal achievement (odds ratio 6.67, 95 percent confidence interval 2.42 to 18.42). Speech pathology showed positive associations as well, with odds ratios of 2.50 for completion and 4.05 for goal achievement. The findings held up in fully adjusted models and in the imputed sensitivity analyses: exercise physiology odds ratios of 5.68 for completion and 7.26 for goal achievement, and speech pathology odds ratios of 2.44 and 3.75 respectively. In plain terms, people who saw an exercise physiologist or speech pathologist were several times more likely to stay in treatment and make progress.

The study also explored dose — whether more contact meant better outcomes. It did. For exercise physiology, a doubling of contact time was associated with approximately 55 percent higher odds of both treatment completion and goal achievement. For speech pathology, doubling contact time increased the odds of completion by roughly 30 to 40 percent, with a 56 percent increase in the odds of goal achievement per unit increase in log-transformed time. The number of exercise physiology contacts was also positively associated with treatment completion. This dose-response pattern suggests that greater therapeutic exposure may itself confer benefit, although the authors caution that clients who accumulated more hours may simply have been more motivated or more stable to begin with.

The broader descriptive findings add important context. Employment and secure housing were consistently linked to better engagement outcomes, while homelessness and schizophrenia spectrum disorders were associated with poorer outcomes. Age mattered too: clients over 41 were more likely to complete treatment, a pattern consistent with developmental criminology research showing that offending typically declines with age, possibly reflecting a growing motivation to close the chapter on justice involvement. Intriguingly, clients who travelled longer to reach the service were more likely to complete treatment — perhaps because those willing to travel represent a more motivated or better-supported subgroup, or because they came from more advantaged suburbs, though the area-level disadvantage measure did not support the latter explanation.

The authors are careful about what the study can and cannot claim. The observational design cannot establish causation; participation in exercise physiology and speech pathology was not random but shaped by clinician judgement, client readiness and capacity to engage, raising the possibility of selection bias. The sample sizes for the adjusted models were modest, particularly for speech pathology, producing wide confidence intervals. Services were delivered largely by single clinicians, so outcomes may partly reflect individual therapeutic style rather than the intervention models themselves. And the two outcome indicators capture observable behaviour, not the attitudinal or relational dimensions of engagement.

Nevertheless, the convergence of the main effects and the dose-response findings across both disciplines strengthens the case that these allied health interventions add value beyond general service contact. The researchers argue that the Victorian program is ideally positioned for a definitive test: four other FMHiCH sites currently operate without exercise physiology and speech pathology, making a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial — in which sites sequentially adopt the interventions over time — a pragmatic next step. A similar design was used successfully in the PULSAR study of recovery-oriented practice training across eighteen Victorian mental health services. If controlled research confirms these associations, the humble gym session and the communication assessment could become standard fixtures of community forensic mental health care, offering a route into treatment for people whom traditional services too often lose.

Subject of Research: Effects of exercise physiology and speech pathology on treatment engagement among adults on community-based forensic mental health orders

Article Title: Exercise physiology and speech pathology support treatment engagement in forensic mental health in community health: evidence from a retrospective cohort study

Article References: Shawyer, F., Wilson, K., Dhungana, R. R., Atkinson, B., Hipgrave, L., Dawadi, S., Enticott, J., & Meadows, G. (2026). Exercise physiology and speech pathology support treatment engagement in forensic mental health in community health: evidence from a retrospective cohort study. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 17, Article 1964444. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2026.1964444

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2026.1964444

Keywords: forensic mental health, exercise physiology, speech pathology, community-based orders, treatment engagement, retrospective cohort study, community health services, odds ratio, dose-response, social determinants of health, Victoria Australia, rehabilitation

The policy at the centre of the study is known as integrated medical and elderly care, or IMEC. Since the mid-2010s, Beijing has pushed hard to dissolve the historical wall between the health sector, which treats disease, and the civil affairs sector, which looks after frail elders. The result has been a wave of hybrid institutions: hospitals that opened long-term care wings, and nursing homes that hired doctors and nurses. On paper, these facilities promise seamless care for people whose needs span both worlds. Whether they actually deliver it is a far more complicated question.

To find out, a team led by researchers at Sichuan Provincial Women’s and Children’s Hospital and Chengdu Medical College ran two parallel surveys between October 2023 and May 2024. On the supply side, they approached all 132 registered IMEC institutions in Chengdu and obtained usable data from 127 of them, split between 77 that grew out of medical providers and 50 that evolved from elderly care facilities. On the demand side, they interviewed 2,525 adults aged 65 and older recruited from communities across the city’s inner, middle and outer rings. The two datasets were never linked at the facility or neighbourhood level, so the comparison is deliberately descriptive rather than causal, but the juxtaposition is revealing.

The institutional survey exposed deep structural heterogeneity hiding beneath a single policy label. Medical-run care institutions, the hospitals-turned-care-providers, had a median of 62.5 per cent of their beds designated as medical beds, compared with just 12.9 per cent in care-run medical institutions. Staffing told the same story: per 100 beds, the medical-run facilities employed roughly twelve times more doctors, eight times more nurses and nearly ten times more technicians. The care-run institutions, by contrast, devoted 87 per cent of their beds to long-term care and carried far more elderly-care attendants relative to bed capacity. Yet when the researchers standardised by actual resident numbers, attendant density was statistically indistinguishable between the two models, at roughly 19 attendants per 100 residents each. The real difference, it turns out, lies in bed allocation and medical staffing, not in the intensity of hands-on care.

Perhaps the most striking finding is what did not differ: overall service breadth. Both organisational models reported considering a median of around 11 of 12 core service domains as needed by community-dwelling older adults, and both claimed the ability to provide only about four to five of them. In other words, whichever door an older person walks through, the menu of services looks broadly similar, and it is strikingly incomplete relative to what providers themselves believe is needed.

That gap between perceived need and actual capacity was the study’s second headline. For palliative care, 63.8 per cent of institutions said community elders needed it, but only 13.4 per cent could provide it. For family beds and home-based medical services, the figures were 58.3 versus 9.4 per cent. Medical services, rehabilitation guidance and psychological or spiritual support all showed shortfalls of roughly 40 percentage points. Even the humblest information function, establishing a health record, was deemed necessary by 72.4 per cent of institutions while only 44.1 per cent could actually deliver it. The authors are careful to note that this is a within-institution comparison, not proof of city-wide supply-demand mismatch, but the pattern is hard to ignore.

The resident survey echoed those gaps from the other direction. Among the 2,525 older adults, 68.8 per cent said they would be willing to choose a community-based integrated care model, a remarkably high figure that suggests the policy has genuine latent appeal. But willingness did not track health status. Sex, chronic disease burden, disability level and out-of-pocket medical spending showed no significant association with willingness in the multivariable logistic regression. What mattered instead were two things: perceived need for convenient home and community medical services, which nearly tripled the odds of willingness with an adjusted odds ratio of 2.76, and simple awareness that community-based integrated care existed, which raised the odds by 55 per cent. Awareness, in a system supposedly built around these services, was reported by only 65 per cent of respondents.

The importance-receipt differences among residents were equally telling. Medical services and health examinations were both widely received and widely valued, with 53.4 and 65.5 per cent of respondents respectively having used them. But the services that would actually keep people living independently at home lagged badly. Family beds and home-based medical services were considered important by 65.7 per cent of older adults yet had been received by only 36.2 per cent. Rehabilitation guidance showed a 58.3 versus 29.1 per cent split, and psychological or spiritual support a 38.5 versus 28.6 per cent gap. These are not fringe services; they are the backbone of ageing in place, the policy goal that Chinese planners, like their counterparts worldwide, have embraced as both humane and fiscally necessary.

The authors connect these findings to a broader conversation about data-supported continuity of care, including the emerging concept of personal health data spaces, or PHDS. The logic is straightforward: integrated care fails if a patient’s information does not travel with them between home visits, community clinics and hospitals. The Chengdu data suggest the organisational foundation for such data flows is shaky, since nearly a third of institutions cannot even establish basic health records. The researchers are careful to stress that their survey did not measure electronic interoperability, consent architecture or cross-provider data exchange, so the PHDS connection remains conceptual. Still, the finding identifies a concrete, measurable weakness in the care-continuity chain that any future data infrastructure would have to fix.

For policymakers, the study’s implications are pointed. Expanding the number of IMEC institutions, the authors argue, matters less than reshaping what those institutions actually offer. Home-based medical care, rehabilitation, chronic disease management and psychosocial support should be treated as core functions rather than optional extras. Service visibility deserves equal attention, since the strong awareness-willingness link suggests that many older adults may simply not know what is available, although the cross-sectional design means this remains a hypothesis rather than a demonstrated causal pathway. The authors also call for differentiated staffing standards and purchasing arrangements for the two organisational models, closer alignment with health insurance and long-term care financing, and spatially sensitive planning, given that the share of residents aged 65 and older in Chengdu ranges from under 10 per cent in some outer districts to over 21 per cent in others.

The study has honest limitations, which the authors catalogue in detail. The household sample was a geographically distributed convenience sample, not a probability survey, and counts of refusals and non-response were not retained. Community identifiers were lost, so within-neighbourhood clustering could not be modelled, potentially making the confidence intervals overly precise. Age, education and income were never collected, leaving the regression open to residual confounding. The perceived-need variable sits conceptually close to the willingness outcome, and the authors’ own sensitivity analysis, which dropped it, produced a model with weak discrimination. Willingness, moreover, is not the same as use. None of this undermines the central descriptive picture, however: a policy that older adults broadly want, delivered by institutions that differ enormously depending on their origin, and falling short precisely in the home-based, rehabilitative and psychosocial services that would make ageing in place real.

Subject of Research: Organisational capacity and older adults' willingness to use community-based integrated medical and elderly care in Chengdu, China

Article Title: Community-based integrated medical and elderly care in Chengdu, China: organisational heterogeneity, service-capacity and service-receipt patterns, and implications for care continuity

Article References: Wang, X., Peng, Y., Liu, J., Bai, M., Peng, J., Heng, C., Yang, Y., Lu, H., Wang, X., Li, C., & Luo, T. (2026). Community-based integrated medical and elderly care in Chengdu, China: organisational heterogeneity, service-capacity and service-receipt patterns, and implications for care continuity. Frontiers in Health Services, 6, Article 1875860. https://doi.org/10.3389/frhs.2026.1875860

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.3389/frhs.2026.1875860

Keywords: integrated care, elderly care, China, Chengdu, ageing in place, long-term care, health policy, care continuity, community health services, cross-sectional study, health records, older adults

The editorial, written by John C. Lin, Corinne M. Rhodes, and Jaya Aysola of the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, responds to one of the largest evaluations of inpatient social needs screening published to date. In the same issue, Rowland and colleagues report on the implementation of screening across eighteen hospitals, offering a rare high-volume view of what happens when health systems systematically ask patients about unmet social needs. The findings capture both the promise and the frustration of the enterprise: patients who screened positive for social needs experienced substantially higher readmission rates in unadjusted analyses, but that association weakened considerably once researchers controlled for demographic and socioeconomic characteristics.

That statistical attenuation is precisely where the interpretive trouble begins. The Pennsylvania authors point out a fundamental tension in how such studies are analyzed. If screening is conceived primarily as a risk stratification tool, then its usefulness depends on whether it improves prediction beyond existing clinical and demographic information, and statistical adjustment for race, insurance coverage, and neighborhood disadvantage is entirely appropriate. But if screening is meant to advance health equity, the relevant question is different: whether it can reveal the mechanisms through which health systems might actually reduce disparities. For that purpose, adjusting away socioeconomic markers may erase the very variation that matters most.

The technical logic is worth unpacking. Characteristics such as race, insurance status, and neighborhood disadvantage are either immutable or reflect decades of structural disinvestment; they are not modifiable treatment targets. Unmet social needs, by contrast, are. When the association between reported needs and readmission weakens after adjustment for these markers, the most plausible reading is not that the needs are unimportant, but that they are unequally distributed across populations shaped by historical and ongoing disadvantage. In other words, social needs sit on the causal pathway between structural inequity and poor outcomes. Controlling for the markers of that inequity statistically absorbs the pathway itself. Seen this way, the editorial argues, the unadjusted finding may be the more clinically and politically useful observation: patients reporting unmet social needs simply do worse.

There is also a temporal problem with the outcome measure itself. Thirty-day readmissions are a technically limited lens for understanding the effects of social circumstances. Improvements in food security, housing stability, or medication access may take months to register in utilization data, and patients with heavy social burdens often have constrained financial capacity to seek care at all. A patient with untreated diabetes and unstable housing may avoid the emergency department entirely until an acute crisis forces the issue, accumulating unmet healthcare needs that never appear in readmission statistics. The editorial notes that neither this study nor most prior work includes follow-up data on whether patients actually connected with social services after screening positive, leaving the most important link in the chain unmeasured.

What the field needs, the authors contend, is a different research architecture altogether: longer follow-up periods, more diverse patient populations, documented delivery of interventions, and longitudinal measurement of both social needs and clinical outcomes such as food security status, patient-reported well-being, and mortality. Without those elements, screening programs generate enormous datasets about need while remaining silent on whether anything was done about it.

This points to the editorial’s sharpest insight: screening is not the intervention. Traditional medical screening carries an implicit contract. When a laboratory test reveals high cholesterol, a defined, evidence-based clinical response follows, from counseling to medication. No such pathway exists for an unmet social need. In the Rowland study, patients who screened positive received referrals to online resource platforms, which typically list community organizations that may lack the capacity or resources to ensure the need is ultimately met. Identifying a problem, in other words, is not solving it, and the authors warn that screening without response risks unintended consequences, a concern raised in the literature for nearly a decade.

A stronger starting point, they suggest, is honesty about what a health system can actually deliver. Rather than administering a questionnaire, staff might tell patients directly that help exists for food access, transportation, or utility bills, and ask whether they would like to speak with someone. This reframing aligns with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine framework for integrating social care, which treats assistance and awareness as two distinct system-level activities. Where navigation programs and direct provision of services do exist, evidence suggests they can improve outcomes, and screening can serve as a meaningful gateway. But the success of these efforts depends less on the screening instrument than on the capacity of health systems and community partners to respond once a need is identified.

The policy backdrop makes this moment particularly fraught. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services mandated quality reporting for social needs screening for inpatient admissions beginning in January 2024 and, in November 2023, issued a framework allowing Medicaid and CHIP programs to cover social needs services. Both actions were subsequently suspended or rescinded in 2025 and 2026. The rollbacks reflected legitimate criticisms: the mandates generated required documentation without clear evidence that providers were connecting patients to resources. But they have created their own problems. The Medicare inpatient reporting requirement was removed with no replacement incentive for addressing social needs, and the rescission of Section 1115 demonstration guidance limits the financing mechanisms that allowed states to fund nutrition, housing, and transportation programs for their Medicaid populations.

The editorial’s proposed alternative is reimbursement structured around navigation and outcomes rather than screening volume. In the CMS Accountable Health Communities model, navigation proved most impactful when delivered alongside alternative payment models such as accountable care organizations, the Medicare Shared Savings Program, and Medicaid managed care plans, where financial incentives to reduce avoidable utilization already exist. States with already-approved Section 1115 demonstrations can still cover social needs services as direct Medicaid benefits, with documented cost-effectiveness. Regionally, the authors suggest, health systems and payers could pool referral volume and negotiate multi-year contracts with community providers for housing, food, and transportation services, addressing the community capacity limitations that the AHC evaluation exposed. The core difficulty is unmistakable: these structural changes demand federal and state policy commitment at precisely the moment that commitment is receding. Rowland and colleagues have shown that high-volume screening is operationally achievable. Whether it improves outcomes remains unproven, and the editorial’s conclusion is blunt: screening may be the starting point, but building a system responsive to social needs, against the current of federal policy, is the harder and more consequential challenge health systems now face.

Subject of Research: Health-related social needs screening in hospitals and its impact on health equity and readmission outcomes

Article Title: Health-Related Social Needs Screening: From Assessment to Action

Article References: Lin, J. C., Rhodes, C. M., & Aysola, J. (2026). Health-Related Social Needs Screening: From Assessment to Action. Journal of General Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-026-10891-9

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s11606-026-10891-9

Keywords: health-related social needs, social needs screening, health equity, hospital readmissions, health policy, Medicaid, Medicare, social determinants of health, patient navigation, Journal of General Internal Medicine, risk stratification, community health services

The research team drew on data from the 2023 wave of the China Longitudinal Aging Social Survey, a nationwide survey conducted by Renmin University of China. The descriptive sample comprised 11,670 adults aged 60 years or older, of whom 11,655 had usable data on chronic conditions. Multimorbidity was defined in a deliberately strict and clinically meaningful way: a participant was considered to have multimorbidity only if they reported two or more chronic conditions that had each been diagnosed by a physician. This physician-confirmed definition matters, because self-reported disease labels can be unreliable, and anchoring the definition to clinical diagnosis reduces the risk of inflating disease burden estimates.

The headline numbers are striking. Among the 11,655 participants with available chronic-condition data, 5,311 people, or 45.6 percent, met the definition of multimorbidity. In other words, nearly one in two older Chinese adults in the survey was living with at least two diagnosed chronic diseases. Against that backdrop, 573 participants, or 4.9 percent of the sample, reported difficulty taking medications independently. That figure was derived from a single functional item asking respondents whether they could take medications by themselves, a deceptively simple question that captures a complex chain of abilities: opening containers, reading labels, remembering schedules, and physically manipulating pills.

To test whether multimorbidity was genuinely associated with medication-taking difficulty rather than merely correlated with it, the researchers used multivariable logistic regression, a statistical technique that estimates the odds of an outcome while adjusting for other characteristics that could confound the relationship. The primary model produced an adjusted odds ratio of 2.682, with a 95 percent confidence interval of 2.163 to 3.324. Because that confidence interval sits entirely above 1, the finding is statistically robust: older adults with multimorbidity had roughly 2.7 times the odds of reporting difficulty taking medications independently compared with those without multimorbidity, after accounting for other measured factors.

Yet the single most powerful predictor in the analysis was not disease count but functional limitation. Participants with functional limitation showed an adjusted odds ratio of 16.495 for difficulty taking medications independently, with a 95 percent confidence interval of 13.140 to 20.708. That is an enormous effect by epidemiological standards, and it makes intuitive sense: taking medication is itself a physical and cognitive task, so impairments in mobility, dexterity, vision or memory translate directly into difficulty managing a pill regimen. The finding reframes medication-taking not as a purely medical behavior but as a functional one, sitting squarely within the domain of daily living activities.

The most technically intriguing result concerns the interaction between multimorbidity and functional limitation. The multiplicative interaction term was statistically significant, with an interaction odds ratio of 0.219 and a 95 percent confidence interval of 0.120 to 0.398. On its face, an interaction odds ratio below 1 might suggest that functional limitation weakens the association between multimorbidity and medication difficulty. But the authors caution against a naive reading of that number. When the team calculated adjusted probabilities of medication-taking difficulty across the combined-status profiles, the highest probability was found among participants who had both multimorbidity and functional limitation. The statistical interaction reflects the way odds ratios behave on a multiplicative scale, where ceiling effects can compress ratios even as absolute risk continues to climb. In practical terms, the two vulnerabilities compound rather than cancel each other out.

This distinction between multiplicative interaction and absolute risk is more than a statistical footnote; it carries real consequences for how screening tools should be built. If analysts looked only at the interaction odds ratio, they might conclude that multimorbidity matters less for people who are already functionally limited. The adjusted probabilities tell the opposite story: the combined-vulnerability group represents the highest-risk profile in the population. For clinicians and policymakers, the lesson is that disease burden and functional status must be assessed together, because each amplifies the practical impact of the other on a person’s ability to manage treatment at home.

The study then took a second analytical step that distinguishes it from much of the existing multimorbidity literature: it connected these health profiles to the use of community healthcare services. Among participants who reported at least one community healthcare service need, the researchers examined whether combined-status profiles predicted unmet need. The result was clear. Older adults with both multimorbidity and difficulty taking medications independently had significantly higher odds of unmet community healthcare service needs, with an adjusted odds ratio of 2.197 and a 95 percent confidence interval of 1.604 to 3.008. The people least able to manage their own medications were also the people most likely to fall through the cracks of the community care system.

This service-gap finding lands at a delicate moment for China’s health system. The country is aging at a pace unmatched in modern history, and its policy response has emphasized strengthening primary and community-level care so that chronic disease management can happen close to home rather than in overcrowded tertiary hospitals. Medication adherence and safe self-administration are central to that vision, because most chronic disease treatment is delivered through daily pharmaceutical regimens. If nearly half of older adults carry multiple chronic conditions and a meaningful minority cannot manage their medications without help, then community health services become the load-bearing infrastructure of the entire chronic disease strategy. The study’s evidence that the combined-vulnerability group faces doubled odds of unmet need suggests that current service planning may not be reaching precisely the people who depend on it most.

The authors argue that their findings support integrating disease burden, functional status and medication-taking ability into a unified assessment of service-related vulnerability, and into needs-based planning for community health services. In practice, that could mean screening for medication-taking difficulty during routine community health visits, flagging older adults who combine multimorbidity with functional limitation for enhanced support such as medication management services, home visits or caregiver training. As with all cross-sectional research, the study captures a single moment in time and cannot establish whether multimorbidity causes medication difficulty or vice versa; the single-item measure of medication-taking ability also leaves room for more granular measurement in future work. But the scale of the dataset, the physician-anchored definition of multimorbidity and the careful layered analysis make a compelling case that the intersection of chronic disease, disability and medication management is where community healthcare in aging societies will be won or lost. For the hundreds of millions of older adults navigating multiple prescriptions across Asia and beyond, the pill bottle, it turns out, is a frontline of healthcare.

Subject of Research: Multimorbidity, functional limitation and medication-taking difficulty among older adults in China

Article Title: Multimorbidity, functional limitation, difficulty taking medications independently, and unmet community healthcare service needs among older adults in China: a cross-sectional analysis of the 2023 CLASS wave

Article References: Mao, W., Chen, Z., Shao, Z., Jiang, W., Gao, L., & Tian, K. (2026). Multimorbidity, functional limitation, difficulty taking medications independently, and unmet community healthcare service needs among older adults in China: a cross-sectional analysis of the 2023 CLASS wave. BMC Health Services Research. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-026-15736-z

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12913-026-15736-z

Keywords: multimorbidity, older adults, medication management, functional limitation, community health services, China, CLASS survey, unmet healthcare needs, cross-sectional study, logistic regression, aging, health services research