Follow-up of an intervention program for caregivers of a relative with dementia living in a long-term care setting: Are there any persistent and delayed effects?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this randomized study was to test the persistent and delayed effects of an intervention program entitled "Taking Care of Myself " on selected mental health outcomes of daughter caregivers of a relative with dementia living in a long-term care setting. One group of caregivers took part in the experimental program (EG, n = 45), one in a comparison program offered by an Alzheimer Society (AG, n = 51), and another constituted a control group (CG, n = 41). Effects were verified at the end of the program and 3 months later. Results from prediction analyses reveal that competence dealing with healthcare staff and use of the coping strategy of reframing were persistent effects unique to the EG condition, whereas perceived availability of informal and formal support was a persistent effect in the EG and in the AG. A delayed effect was observed in the AG regarding competence dealing with healthcare staff. These results underline the importance of follow-up assessments of intervention programs and suggest avenues to support caregivers of institutionalized seniors.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".