MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071635250 · doi:10.1177/1471301210375316

Development of a conceptual framework of positive aspects of caregiving in dementia

2010· article· en· W2071635250 on OpenAlex
Hélène Carbonneau, Chantal Caron, Johanne Desrosiers

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueDementia · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeHealth and Social Services Centre University Institute of Geriatrics of SherbrookeUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsConceptualizationDementiaConceptual frameworkPsychologyContext (archaeology)Conceptual modelDevelopmental psychologyMedicineSociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research on family caregivers usually focuses more on stress and burden, especially in the context of looking after a person with dementia. This leads to fewer considerations of positive aspects of caregiving. Thus enhancing these positive aspects represents an innovative approach to caregivers’ support. Furthermore, these aspects need more conceptualization to underpin the development of such an approach. This article proposes a conceptual framework of the positive aspects of caregiving based on an integrative literature review. This conceptual framework provides a comprehensive model that should improve understanding of positive aspects of caregiving. It could also contribute to the development of innovative support programs based on the positive aspects instead of the negative aspects of caregiving.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.290 · 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