Physiological Measurements of Stress Preceding Incidents of Challenging Behavior in People With Severe to Profound Intellectual Disabilities: Longitudinal Study Protocol of Single-Case Studies
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Clients with severe to profound intellectual disabilities (SPID) and challenging behavior (CB) and the professional caregivers that support them are vulnerable to high stress levels, which negatively impact their well-being and the quality of care. CB is thought to result from an increase in the intensity and frequency of clients' stress experiences. In turn, staff members experience stress in dealing with this behavior, and stressed staff members might behave in ways that increase clients' stress levels, contributing to the origin and maintenance of CB. Research into these dyadic interactions between clients and staff is scarce for people with SPID, especially in real-life situations. The barriers of studying stress in this population include clients' difficulties in communicating stress experiences and the lack of an objective continuous measure of stress. OBJECTIVE: This paper presents a protocol for studying patterns of physiological stress in 15 client-caregiver dyads in the 30 minutes preceding incidents of CB compared to control periods without CB and the interplay between the stress levels of clients and professional caregivers. METHODS: We will conduct 15 single-case studies to assess patterns of physiological stress in dyads of clients with SPID and professional caregivers prior to CB in several Dutch residential institutes. Client-caregiver dyads will wear the Empatica E4 wristband for 20 sessions of 3 to 8 hours without interruptions of daily routines while caregivers report clients' CB. The physiological measures obtained will be electrodermal activity (microsiemens) and heart rate (beats per minute). A multilevel model with repeated measures at the incident level nested within the person level will be applied, employing separate models for electrodermal activity and heart rate to compare stress levels in the 30 minutes prior to incidents with control epochs. Covariates in the models include movement, temperature, and gender. In addition, cross-recurrence quantification analyses will be performed to study the synchronization between the stress levels of clients and professional caregivers. RESULTS: The Ethics Committee of the Radboud University (NL-number: NL71683.091.19) approved the study on February 12, 2020. In total, 15 organizations have declared their commitment to participate in the study. The first result is expected in the spring of 2022. CONCLUSIONS: Study results will demonstrate whether changes in patterns of electrodermal activity and heart rate are apparent in the 30 minutes preceding an incident of CB compared to baseline levels when the client does not engage in CB. The synchronization between caregivers' and clients' physiological stress levels will be explored with cross-recurrence quantification analyses. Insights into the physiological stress levels of clients and caregivers may contribute to a reduction of CB and an improvement of both clients' and caregivers' safety and well-being. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/24911.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,016 | 0,012 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».