A Study of a Secure Garden in the Care of People with Alzheimer's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Specially designed outdoor spaces (SDOS) have been developed to improve the quality of life of people with dementia. However, few follow-up studies have been done to examine their use once implemented. The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of how SDOS are used and the objectives of their design fulfilled. A qualitative descriptive study was conducted of a SDOS 3 years after it was built to answer the following questions: How has the garden changed from the original design? What are the current patterns of use of the garden? What factors facilitate use of the garden? What are the barriers to use of the garden? Four main sources of data were used: landscape architectural drawings, non-participant observation, focus groups, and in-depth interviews. The results lend support to the theoretical principles of garden design in the literature. The garden was considered an important part of the service program. However, factors such as garden maintenance, organizational support, staff training, and accessibility may limit its impact.
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) | 0.001 | 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".