MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078454377 · doi:10.1080/1360786031000150676

Can we help persons with dementia find their way in a new environment?

2003· article· en· W2078454377 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAging & Mental Health · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsEngineers Without Borders CanadaToronto Rehabilitation Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMcNemar's testIntervention (counseling)MedicineNursing homesRandomized controlled trialDementiaGerontologyGerontological nursingRepeated measures designPsychologyPhysical therapyNursingDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to conduct a randomized controlled trial to examine the effects of a way-finding intervention on residents' ability to find their way in a new environment. The effect of the intervention on the residents' spatial orientation and agitation were also examined. The study was conducted on four nursing home units in a geriatric center and the final sample consisted of 32 residents with Alzheimer's disease (17 in the treatment group and 15 in the control group). The intervention consisted of the use of a location map and a behavioral training technique, which was provided to residents over the course of a month. Repeated measures analysis of variance and McNemar tests were used to compare the groups in regard to changes in the outcomes over time. Results indicated that the residents' in the treatment group demonstrated an increased ability to find their way to the dining room one week after the intervention. The intervention effect was not sustained three months later.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.703
Threshold uncertainty score0.393

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.210 · 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