MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331823787 · doi:10.1177/1471301211421264

‘The problem with Leonard’: A critical constructionist view of need-driven dementia-compromised behaviours

2011· article· en· W2331823787 on OpenAlexaff
Sharon Koehn, Jean‐Francois Kozak, Elisabeth Drance

Bibliographic record

VenueDementia · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsProvidence Health CareBC Mental Health & Substance Use ServicesUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialDementiaSituatedPerceptionPsychologyStrict constructionismFocus groupQuality of life (healthcare)Social psychologyDevelopmental psychologyDiseaseSociologyPsychiatryMedicinePsychotherapistEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This critical constructionist case study of ‘Leonard,’ a man with frontotemporal dementia living on a special care unit predominantly populated by people with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias, explores how healthy others’ perceptions of the prevailing physical and psychosocial environment were influenced by Leonard’s behaviour which, in turn, was influenced by people’s perceptions of him as a ‘problem’. Data were obtained through participant observations, individual interviews with staff and residents, and focus groups with family members and nursing staff. Leonard’s ‘needs-driven dementia-compromised’ behaviours are not recognized as such by many of the healthy others with whom he co-creates his psychosocial environment; rather he is constructed as deviant, which undermines his selfhood as well as his quality of life. Education of staff and family members as well as broad organizational change is needed to address the issues underlying the problems for which Leonard is blamed but instead arise largely from the environment within which Leonard is situated.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.382
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDementiaSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207