MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095292188 · doi:10.3928/00989134-20120807-05

Bathing People with Dementia: When Education Is Not Enough

2012· article· en· W2095292188 on OpenAlexaff
Gina Gaspard, L. L. Cox

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gerontological Nursing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsFraser Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBathingDementiaGerontological nursingFocus groupQualitative researchNursingPerceptionPsychologyNursing homesHealth careMedicineGerontologyBusinessSociologyMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative study describes health care assistants' (HCA) perceptions and experiences related to bathing people with dementia in residential care settings. Data were collected from three focus groups with 18 HCA participants from 12 different residential care facilities. HCAs constructed two definitions of a successful bath, which informed their choice of bathing strategies. Three themes emerged from the data analysis in regard to their bathing strategies: I Know You, I Am All Alone, and I Am Not Prepared. These data informed the development of a framework to guide gerontological nurses in creating and supporting the opportunity for successful bathing.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.603
Threshold uncertainty score0.866

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.341 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Gerontological NursingSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207