‘Taking Care of Myself’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this randomized study was to test the efficacy of an intervention programme entitled ‘Taking Care of Myself’ on selected indicators of mental health of daughter caregivers of elderly parents with dementia living in a long-term care setting. The programme is based on an empowerment perspective and on a stress and coping theoretical framework. Three groups of caregivers were compared: one took part in the experimental programme (EG, N= 45), one in a comparison programme offered by a Quebec Alzheimer Society (AG, N = 51), and another was a control group (CG, N = 41). Two successful outcomes are unique to the EG condition, that is, competence dealing with health care staff and perceived challenge of the caregiver role. Prediction analyses also provide statistical support for the efficacy of the EG and AG conditions to produce successful outcomes with respect to common indicators (perceived threat and role overload, control by self, informal/formal social support, and use of the coping strategy of reframing). These results provide avenues of intervention for promoting the mental health of caregivers of an institutionalized relative.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".