MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2416743136 · doi:10.7748/nop.15.8.8.s11

Can we help persons with dementia find their way in a new environment?

2003· article· en· W2416743136 on OpenAlex
John Adams

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Older People · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChainingDementiaIntervention (counseling)NursingNursing homesTest (biology)PsychologyGerontologyMedicineDevelopmental psychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been concern for many years that an older person with dementia is likely to experience increased disorientation if moved from one setting to another. A policy of rebuilding Canadian nursing homes and relocating their residents led these researchers to test a strategy for improving residents' ability to find their way in a new environment. A randomised controlled trial conducted in four nursing homes compared an intervention consisting of the use of a location map and a behavioural training technique called 'backward chaining' with a control group who did not receive it. 'Backward chaining' involved breaking the trip down into smaller sections which were rehearsed individually, with the section of the journey nearest the intended destination (the dining room) being learned first. The results indicated that residents in the treatment group demonstrated an increased ability to find their way to the dining room after one week, but that this effect was not maintained after three months.

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)0.000
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 score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.188 · 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