MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1838991091 · doi:10.1177/1471301215614572

From wandering to wayfaring: Reconsidering movement in people with dementia in long-term care

2015· article· en· W1838991091 on OpenAlex
Megan E. Graham

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDementia · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaMovement (music)PsychologyPsychological interventionPhraseLong-term careGerontologyMedicineDiseasePsychiatryLinguisticsAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The movement of people with dementia in long-term care continues to be an issue of concern among clinicians, caregivers and families. This article will examine the social construction "wandering" and its association with pathology, risk discourse and surveillance technologies. Further, the article will explore the recent shift from the term "wanderer" to the phrase "people who like to walk" in person-centred dementia care. Engaging with Ingold's concept of movement as wayfaring, an alternative becoming-centred understanding of movement and its significance for people with dementia will be presented and illustrated through a case study. The paper concludes that depathologizing movement opens the possibility to see movement in people with dementia as an intention to be alive and to grow, rather than as a product of disease and deterioration. Suggestions for future research and implications for care interventions are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.252
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it