An Education Intervention to Enhance Staff Self-Efficacy to Provide Dementia Care in an Acute Care Hospital in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Education is needed for enhanced capacity of acute hospitals to provide dementia care. A nonrandomized controlled, repeated-measures design was used to evaluate a dementia education program delivered to an intervention group (IG, n = 468), compared to a wait-listed group (n = 277), representing separate sites of a multisite hospital. Participants completed self-efficacy for dementia and satisfaction measures and provided written descriptions of dementia care collected at baseline, postintervention (IG only), and at 8-week follow-up. Oral narratives were gathered from IG participants 8 weeks postintervention. The IG demonstrated significant improvement in self-efficacy scores from baseline to immediately postintervention (P < .001), sustained at 8 weeks. There were no changes from baseline to 8 weeks postintervention evident in the wait-listed group (P = .21). Intervention group participants described positive impacts including implementation of person-centered care approaches. Implementation of dementia care education programs throughout hospital settings is promising for the enhancement of dementia care.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".