"Learning to Become a Family Caregiver" Efficacy of an Intervention Program for Caregivers Following Diagnosis of Dementia in a Relative
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this experimental study was to test the efficacy of a psychoeducational individual program conceived to facilitate transition to the caregiver role following diagnosis of Alzheimer disease in a relative. DESIGN AND METHODS: Caregivers were recruited in memory clinics and randomized to an experimental group (n = 62) or a control group (n = 49) receiving usual care. Eligible participants-primary caregivers of a relative diagnosed with Alzheimer in the past 9 months-were assessed blindly before randomization, at the end of the program (post-test), and 3 months later (follow-up) on different outcomes associated with healthy role transition. RESULTS: The analyses indicated that at post-test and follow-up, caregivers in the experimental group were more confident in dealing with caregiving situations, perceived themselves to be better prepared to provide care and more efficacious in their caregiver role, were better able to plan for the future care needs of their relative, had better knowledge of available services, and made more frequent use of the coping strategies of problem solving and reframing. The program had no significant effect on use of stress-management strategies, perceived informal support and family conflicts. IMPLICATIONS: This program underscores that a proactive intervention approach from the onset of the care trajectory is key to fostering caregiver adaptation to the new challenges they must meet.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".