An exploration of the burden experienced by spousal caregivers of individuals with Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although previous research has attempted to identify the needs of caregivers for individuals with Parkinson's disease (PD), most has focused on the demands associated with the physical needs of the patient, and not on "mental burden." This study used the repertory grid method to capture the full range of caregivers' subjective experience, quantify their perceptions, and to acquire information that might be useful in directing remediation attempts. Within this sample, caregivers reported far greater burden from "mental stress" (e.g., worrying about individual's safety) than from "physical stress" (e.g., lifting individual into bed). Specifically, caregivers were primarily concerned about spousal safety, as this requires continuous vigilance and constant worry. Caregivers also reported experiencing "little deaths" as the disease progresses, related to a loss of independence for the couple, and the steady diminishment of social networks. Increasing attention on the mental burden experienced by spousal caregivers promises to increase quality of care, and quality of life for individuals with PD, by improving quality of life for the caregiver.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".