Matched and mismatched appraisals of the effectiveness of communication strategies by family caregivers of persons with Alzheimer's disease
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Communication problems stemming from Alzheimer's disease (AD) often result in misunderstandings that can be linked with problem behaviours and increased caregiver stress. Moreover, these communication breakdowns also can result either from caregivers' use of ineffective communication strategies, which paradoxically are perceived as helpful, or can occur as a result of not using effective communication strategies that are perceived as unhelpful. AIMS: The two primary aims were to determine the effectiveness of strategies used to resolve communication breakdowns and to examine whether caregivers' ratings of strategy effectiveness were consistent with evidence from video-recorded conversations and with effective communication strategies documented in the literature. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Twenty-eight mealtime conversations were recorded using a sample of 15 dyads consisting of individuals with early, middle and late clinical-stage AD and their family caregivers. Conversations were analysed using the trouble-source repair paradigm to identify the communication strategies used by caregivers to resolve breakdowns. Family caregivers also rated the helpfulness of communication strategies used to resolve breakdowns. Analyses were conducted to assess the overlap or match between the use and appraisals of the helpfulness of communication strategies. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Matched and mismatched appraisals of communication strategies varied across stages of AD. Matched appraisals by caregivers of persons with early-stage AD were observed for 68% of 22 communication strategies, whereas caregivers of persons with middle- and late-stage AD had matched appraisals for 45% and 55% of the strategies, respectively. Moreover, caregivers of persons with early-stage AD had matched appraisals over and above making matched appraisals by chance alone, compared with caregivers of persons in middle- and late-stage AD. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Mismatches illustrate the need for communication education and training, particularly to establish empirically derived evidence-based communication strategies over the clinical course of AD.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 it