MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033854539 · doi:10.1002/nur.20152

Implementation and effects of an individual stress management intervention for family caregivers of an elderly relative living at home: A mixed research design

2006· article· en· W2033854539 on OpenAlexaff
Francine Ducharme, Paule Lebel, Lise Lachance, Denise Trudeau

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch in Nursing & Health · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, psychology, and well-being
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de MontréalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)EmpowermentFamily caregiversResearch designPsychologySocial supportStress managementQualitative researchRelevance (law)NursingGerontologyMedicineClinical psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this project was to evaluate the implementation and effects of a stress management intervention for family caregivers of elderly persons. The intervention was implemented through an action research design with the collaboration of case managers working in community health centers. A total of 81 caregivers participated in the study. The quasi-experimental design used to test the effects of the intervention showed significant effects on perceived challenge associated with caregiver role, control by self, use of social support, and use of problem solving. Qualitative data demonstrate caregiver empowerment with respect to the caregiving role. This study illustrates the relevance of using a mixed research design in order to provide evidence for changes in practice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.579
Teacher spread0.408 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch in Nursing & HealthSame topicHealth, psychology, and well-beingFrench-language works237,207