‘We can't keep going on like this’: identifying family storylines in young onset dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT In this study, we identify the dominant storylines that were embedded in the narratives of younger people with dementia and their nominated family members. By implementing a longitudinal, narrative design underpinned by biographical methods we generated detailed family biographies with five families during repeated and planned research contacts (N=126) over a 12–15-month period between 2009 and 2010. The application of narrative analysis within and between each family biography resulted in the emergence of five family storyline types that were identified as: agreeing; colluding; conflicting; fabricating; and protecting. Whilst families were likely to use each of these storylines at different points and at different times in their exposure to young onset dementia, it was found that families that adopted a predominantly ‘agreeing’ storyline were more likely to find ways of positively overcoming challenges in their everyday lives. In contrast, families who adopted predominantly ‘conflicting’ and ‘colluding’ storylines were more likely to require help to understand family positions and promote change. The findings suggest that the identification of the most dominant and frequently occurring storylines used by families may help to further understand family experience in young onset dementia and assist in planning supportive services.
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 | 0.000 | 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".