Symbolic meaning of relocation to a residential care facility for persons with dementia
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
OBJECTIVES: This study explored the perspectives of persons with dementia (PWD) on the meanings and experiences associated with relocation to a residential care facility (RCF). METHODS: A qualitative design was employed, which involved in-depth interviews with 16 PWD at their homes within two months prior to relocation. The work of Strauss and Corbin guided the analysis process. RESULTS: Participants viewed relocation to an RCF as a major residential change and life transition requiring significant adaptive efforts. The experience clearly had a profound personal meaning for the participating PWD, shaped by their unique personal identities, psycho-environmental histories and current living circumstances. However, despite individual variations, four major themes captured the common perspectives and experiences in the sample. Relocation to an RCF: (a) symbolized the end of an era and a long-established way of life; (b) signaled the inevitable downward trajectory of old age; (c) meant living a more protected, dependent, structured and communal lifestyle in a place that is associated with 'hospitality' and 'rest'; and (d) presented a life course challenge that could be dealt with by drawing on one's sense of identity as a 'survivor'. CONCLUSION: The findings raise awareness of the subjective meanings of residential transitions in the experience of aging with dementia, and inform supportive interventions to optimize housing decisions for PWD in order to promote successful adaptation to their new living environments.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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