Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this evaluation was to carry out an evaluation of the Just Checking activity monitoring system, which supports people with dementia in their own homes. The study was carried out with Warwickshire County Council's social services, and a number of their service users. The system was installed in the homes of six people with dementia, and used by their family carers and care professionals, whose experiences were gathered in semi‐structured interviews. In total 15 people took part in interviews, including two of the people with dementia.The system gave family carers and professionals a better insight into the activities of the person with dementia, and how they were managing in their own homes. The majority of users were surprised at the consistency of the daily pattern of activity of the person with dementia and, as a result, their view of the capabilities of the person changed. The data from the system reassured family carers and proved a useful assessment tool for professionals on which to plan care.Contrary to expectations, the monitoring system gave people with dementia more control of their lives by providing a means by which they could communicate their capabilities in their home environment.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| 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".