MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997093513 · doi:10.1177/0193945905276882

Seeking to Understand Telephone Support for Dementia Caregivers

2005· article· en· W1997093513 on OpenAlex

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

VenueWestern Journal of Nursing Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaFeelingIntervention (counseling)Emotional supportService providerLearned helplessnessNursingReferralSocial supportPsychologyQualitative researchMedicineService (business)Clinical psychologyPsychotherapistSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Caregivers of persons with dementia encounter particular challenges in their roles and often experience unmet needs for information and emotional support. This article describes a qualitative descriptive study designed to explore the intervention of telephone support for such caregivers. Data were collected from both caregivers and telephone support providers. Results revealed that telephone support met four specific needs of dementia caregivers: the need for (a) information and education, (b) referral and/or assistance required to navigate through the system, (c) emotional support, and (d) caregiver support that is convenient and hassle free. Caregivers' main experience with the intervention was the sense of companionship, whereas service providers experienced mixed feelings of helplessness and an opportunity to empower caregivers.

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)0.003
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.343 · 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