Measuring family perceived involvement in individualized long-term care
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although family involvement is considered an important aspect of care for residents with dementia in long-term care facilities, measurement is lacking. The purpose of this study is to present a multi-item reliable measurement instrument assessing family perceived involvement. Literature reviews, observations within facilities, iterative consultations with an expert panel and extensive pilot testing of items for family perceived involvement were undertaken, to establish face and content validity. Two scales were developed: family perceived involvement and family assessment of importance of their involvement in individualized care for their resident relative. Strong evidence of face and content validity, internal consistency and test-retest reliability were established for both scales. Short versions of the original scales were derived via factor analysis. These instruments provide researchers and facilities with the ability to measure both degree of family perceived involvement and the importance the family places on that involvement using a relatively brief set of statements.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 it