MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144257333 · doi:10.1177/0164027514549258

Caregiver Well-Being

2014· article· en· W2144257333 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch on Aging · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntersectionalityPsychologyDementiaSelf-esteemCognitionGerontologyDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatryGender studiesSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We know much about caregiving women compared with caregiving men and caregiving spouses compared with caregiving adult children. We know less about the intersections of relationship and gender. This article explores this intersection through the well-being (burden and self-esteem) of caregivers to family members with dementia. Throughout British Columbia, Canada, 873 caregivers were interviewed in person for on average, over 1½ hours. The results reveal that daughters experience the highest burden but also the highest self-esteem, suggesting the role is less salient for their self-identities. Wives emerge as the most vulnerable of the four groups when both burden and self-esteem are considered. The data confirm the usefulness of the intersectionality framework for understanding co-occupancy of more than one status and indicate that positive cognitive well-being and negative affective well-being can be differentially related. Multivariate analyses confirm the importance of caregiver, not patient, characteristics for burden and self-esteem.

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 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)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.825

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.362 · 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