Caring for Others: Internet Health Care Support Intervention for Family Caregivers of Persons with Alzheimer's, Stroke, or Parkinson's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the project was to emulate face-to-face psychosocial support group process in an Internet videoconferencing environment and explore the benefits for 34 family caregivers of persons with neurodegenerative disease. Caregivers were provided with computer equipment and trained to access a password-protected Web site. Using videoconferencing software, each group of 6 members met with a facilitator online weekly for 10 weeks. Each caregiver was interviewed at 6-month follow-up. Participant response data were generated through qualitative analysis of group process and follow-up interviews. The analysis showed that the virtual group process closely paralleled face-to-face group interactions. At follow-up, 90% of the caregivers reported that the online group experience had been “very” or “overall” positive and that the group had helped them cope with the stresses of caregiving. The professional and ethical implications of providing a clinical intervention using the Internet 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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".