MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2411023691 · doi:10.7748/ns.30.7.46.s47

Person-centred care for people with dementia: Kitwood reconsidered

2015· article· en· W2411023691 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Gary Mitchell, Joanne Agnelli

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Standard · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMental Health and Psychiatry
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlzheimer Society
KeywordsDementiaCompetence (human resources)NursingHealth carePsychologySocial careCare workWork (physics)Social workMedicineDiseaseSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a plethora of literature on person-centred care and its importance in health care. The principles of person-centred care are especially important for people living with dementia because of the clinical manifestations of the disease. This article intends to provide nurses with an overview of the work of Tom Kitwood and how it pertains to providing best practice in dementia care. Various person-centred theories have been developed. However, Kitwood's work is by far the most widely referred to in dementia care. An understanding of Kitwood's ideas, in particular those of malignant social psychology and positive person work, enables nurses to develop competence in delivering optimum person-centred care to people with dementia in clinical practice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.041
Scholarly communication0.0120.019
Open science0.0040.010
Research integrity0.0110.020
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations135
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing StandardSame topicMental Health and PsychiatryFrench-language works237,207