Intergenerational Programs for Persons With Dementia: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Participation in intergenerational programs can have a positive impact on quality of life and well-being across age groups. We sought to examine the characteristics, goals, and outcomes of intergenerational programs for persons with dementia and children or youth. Six hundred and seventy-nine unique abstracts were identified through a search of 7 medical databases, 16 social science databases, 2 gray literature databases, and other sources. Twenty-seven articles met criteria for review. Articles must have gathered information on program design, goals, outcomes, or participants' perceptions. Overall, 3 themes emerged: program design, outcomes for child or youth participants, and outcomes for persons with dementia. Music, arts-based, and narrative programs were most common. Outcomes include effects on perceptions of aging and dementia, behavior, mood, engagement and sense of self. The use of qualitative and quantitative data, as well as descriptive articles, provided a richer picture of the relational features of intergenerational programs to emerge. The type of program had less of an impact on positive outcomes than if the activity was meaningful for participants and supported shared opportunities for relationship building and growth. The relationship-based skill set and scope of social work practitioners provides opportunity for the development, facilitation, and evaluation of intergenerational programs. The difficulties of establishing best practices due to methodological challenges and implications for further research are presented.
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 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".