MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047826718 · doi:10.1177/1533317513494443

The Unique Experience of Spouses in Early-Onset Dementia

2013· article· en· W2047826718 on OpenAlexafffund
Francine M. Ducharme, Marie‐Jeanne Kergoat, Pascal Antoine, Florence Pasquier, Renée Coulombe

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Alzheimer s Disease & Other Dementias® · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSpouseDenialDementiaPsychological interventionPsychologyGriefFamily caregiversClinical psychologyGerontologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicinePsychotherapistPsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To date, few studies have examined the experience of spouse caregivers living with a person with early-onset dementia. Moreover, few support resources are offered to these family caregivers and fewer are still tailored to their unique trajectory. The aim of this qualitative study was to document the lived experience of spouse caregivers of young patients in order to inform the development of professional support tailored to their reality. A sample of 12 spouses of persons diagnosed with dementia before the age of 65 participated in semistructured interviews. Six themes emerged from their caregiver trajectories, namely, difficulty managing behavioral and psychological symptoms, long quest for diagnosis, nondisclosure to others and denial of diagnosis, grief for loss of spouse and midlife projects, difficulty juggling unexpected role and daily life responsibilities, and difficulty planning for future. Results open up innovative avenues for the development of interventions geared to facilitating role transition for these spouse 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations126
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Alzheimer s Disease & Other Dementias®Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207