An Implementation Study of Reminiscence in Dementia Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this mixed methods study was to identify factors affecting successful implementation of a group reminiscence intervention led by professional caregivers for persons with dementia residing in a long-term care (LTC) facility and their family members. Implementation outcome variables included fidelity, feasibility, adoption, appropriateness, sustainability, and acceptability of reminiscence as a group intervention, and were measured using nominal group technique interviews to collect opinions of both professional caregivers and family members. A subsidiary goal was to gather quantitative data on the effectiveness of reminiscence in improving mental health and quality of life (QoL) of persons with dementia using a pre-post intervention design. Results indicated high fidelity and feasibility for reminiscence as a group intervention in dementia care. Both groups of participants considered the intervention to be appropriate. The adoption of reminiscence as an activity might be limited by a lack of confidence of the professional caregivers in their abilities to conduct a group intervention. Family members shared this opinion. The professional caregivers also expressed potential difficulty in integrating reminiscence in their work routine, thus diminishing its acceptability in dementia care. For family members, the sustainability of the program may depend on their level of implication in the development and organization of the intervention sessions. Results also showed significant improvements (Wilcoxon p < .05) in apathy, as self-measured by the residents, and in anxiety, as measured by the professional caregivers. Apathy symptoms as measured by the professional caregivers, however, did not show a significant decrease post-intervention. Family members reported an improvement in their relative’s QoL one week post-intervention, whereas the residents reported improvement in their QoL three months post-intervention. Results showed that a group reminiscence intervention was not only possible but also beneficial to residents with dementia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".