MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2618388212 · doi:10.1186/s12875-017-0639-8

“We’re certainly not in our comfort zone”: a qualitative study of GPs’ dementia-care educational needs

2017· article· en· W2618388212 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
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

VenueBMC Family Practice · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity College CorkAlzheimer SocietyHealth Service ExecutiveAtlantic Philanthropies
KeywordsDementiaGlobal Positioning SystemMedicineNursingQualitative researchSociologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.356
Threshold uncertainty score0.741

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.350 · 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