MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146608583 · doi:10.1080/13607863.2013.856860

‘Getting to Know Me’: the development and evaluation of a training programme for enhancing skills in the care of people with dementia in general hospital settings

2013· article· en· W2146608583 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAging & Mental Health · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaScale (ratio)MedicineIntervention (counseling)NursingPsychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The aims of the study were to report on the development and evaluation of a staff training intervention in dementia care designed for use in the general hospital setting: the 'Getting to Know Me' training programme. The study also aimed to undertake initial psychometric analysis on two new outcome scales designed to measure knowledge and confidence in dementia care. METHODS: The study comprised two phases. The first phase comprised the design of two questionnaires which are shared within this paper: Confidence in Dementia (CODE) Scale and Knowledge in Dementia (KIDE) Scale. In phase two, staff undertook the 'Getting to Know Me' training programme (n=71). The impact of the programme was evaluated using a pre-post design which explored: (1) changes in confidence in dementia; (2) changes in knowledge in dementia; and (3) changes in beliefs about challenging behaviour. RESULTS: The psychometric properties of the CODE and KIDE scales are reported. Statistically significant change was identified pre-post training on all outcome measures. Clinically meaningful change was demonstrated on the CODE scale. CONCLUSIONS: The 'Getting to Know Me' programme was well received and had a significant impact on staff knowledge and confidence. Our findings add to a growing evidence base which will be strengthened by further robust studies, the exploration of the impact of staff training on direct patient outcomes, and further identification of ways in which to transfer principles of care from specialist dementia environments into general hospital settings.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.457
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.329 · 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