Engaging caregivers: exploring perspectives on web-based health information
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Informal or family caregivers are important contributors to health and health care and require support to sustain their role and address particular challenges. An experience-based health website may be an accessible, effective way to offer caregivers peer support and ultimately better equip them to care for themselves and their loved ones. Objectives: This study investigated how caregivers access and use information on the Internet about caregiving and their perspectives on the design and features of a new personal health experiences (PHEx) website. Methods: This was a qualitative descriptive study that involved three focus groups of caregivers for a total of 16 participants in a university-affiliated hospital in Quebec. Thematic analysis was used with transcriptions of recorded sessions. Results: With respect to how participants accessed and used health information, three themes emerged: searching for and choosing health websites, empowerment through the use of online health information, and concerns about health information on the Internet. In terms of their views on a health experiences website, the two main themes were: factors important for first impressions and perceived needs and expectations. Conclusion: Caregivers accessed and chose health information in a similar manner to other people but still offered additional insights regarding online health information retrieval, usage, and other perspectives, which will be helpful for future web-based initiatives that aim to provide support to caregivers.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.003 |
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".