“We’re certainly not in our comfort zone”: a qualitative study of GPs’ dementia-care educational needs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rising dementia prevalence rates rise combined with the policy objective of enabling people with dementia to remain living at home, means that there will be a growing demand for dementia care in the community setting. However, GPs are challenged by dementia care and have identified it as an area in which further training is needed. Previous studies of GPs dementia care educational needs have explored the views of GPs alone, without taking the perspectives of people with dementia and family carers into account. The aim of the study was to explore GPs' dementia care educational needs, as viewed from multiple perspectives, in order to inform the design and delivery of an educational programme for GPs. METHODS: A qualitative study of GPs, people with dementia and family carers in a community setting was undertaken. Face-to-face interviews were performed with GPs, people with dementia and with family carers. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed. RESULTS: Thirty-one people were interviewed, consisting of fourteen GPs, twelve family carers and five people with dementia. GPs expressed a wish for further education, preferentially through small group workshops. Five distinct educational needs emerged from the interviews, namely, diagnosis, disclosure, signposting of local services, counselling and the management of behavioural and psychological symptoms (BPSD). While GPs focused on diagnosis, disclosure and BPSD in particular, people with dementia and family carers emphasised the need for GPs to engage in counselling and signposting of local services. CONCLUSIONS: The triangulation of data from multiple relevant sources revealed a broader range of GPs' educational needs, incorporating both medical and social aspects of dementia care. The findings of this study will inform the content and delivery of a dementia educational programme for GPs that is practice-relevant, by ensuring that the curriculum meets the needs of GPs, patients and their families.
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 | 0.014 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".