Feasibility of Using Telehealth to Deliver the “Powerful Tools for Caregivers” Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Caregivers report poorer health and wellness than the general population and identify numerous barriers to their attending programs to improve health and wellness. The purpose of this study was to explore the feasibility of employing a telehealth delivery method to enhance access to caregiver wellness programs. This article presents the quantitative results of a mixed methods feasibility study of translating the Powerful Tools for Caregivers (PTC) program to a telehealth delivery format. Four unpaid family caregivers of older adults participated in a telehealth delivered PTC program, a wellness program with established outcomes in the in-person environment. The program was delivered using synchronous videoconferencing methods. High class attendance and a high median total average Telehealth Usability Questionnaire score of 5.7 indicated the telehealth delivery method was feasible. This research suggests that telehealth is a feasible delivery format for a caregiver program traditionally delivered in an in-person format.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".