The meanings of screams in older people living with dementia in a nursing home
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Screaming is common among older persons living with dementia in nursing homes. Research on this population has not provided a useful basis for understanding such behavior that could help determine appropriate interventions. The purpose of this study was to explore the meanings of screams in older people living with dementia and their influencing factors. METHODS: Critical ethnography was selected as the research design. Seven triads, each composed of an older person living with dementia who screamed, a primary family caregiver, and one or two formal caregivers, were recruited in a nursing home. Various data collection methods and Spradley's (1979) ethnographic analysis were used. RESULTS: Screaming is related to vulnerability, suffering, and loss of meaning experienced by older persons. This singular behavior also expresses various final outcomes that can be differentiated through modulation criteria. The meanings of screams are influenced by stability and flexibility in the nursing care organization and reciprocal effects between older persons who scream and others in the nursing home environment. Each person's screams constitute a unique language that can be learned. Other influencing factors include respect for the older person's wishes, needs, and personality, shifts in power relations within the triad, and feelings of powerlessness and guilt in family and formal caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: This study advances knowledge of the meanings of screams in older persons living with dementia. It has implications for and offers insight on culturally congruent care for older persons living with dementia and the people around them.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".