ENGAGING PEOPLE WITH DEMENTIA IN USING AN ELECTRONIC PILL DISPENSER: RESEARCH PROTOCOL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many studies show that people with dementia are able to learn skills, but findings concerning their ability to use technologies are inconsistent. Therefore, details about active ingredients that make intervention using technologies successful are needed. This study describes the development and evaluation of a rehabilitation approach integrating specific learning strategies that engage people with mild Alzheimer Disease (AD) and their caregivers, in managing their medication with an electronic pill dispenser. Phase 1 will consist in developing an approach that is based on the state of knowledge concerning the cognitive profile of people with AD and their learning capacities. Validation of this approach will be iterative and involve semi-structured interviews with nine key actors (three persons with AD, three caregivers and three health professionals). Content analysis will help to identify which elements should be modified in order to maximize the acceptability and coherence of this approach. In phase 2, five dyads (person with AD and caregiver) will be implicated in the evaluation of the efficacy of this approach with an ABA multiple baseline across participants design. Medication management will be quantified using an observation chart and will also be filmed once a week to be rated by blinded evaluators. Phase 3 will involve five semi-structured interviews with the caregivers to understand their experience. This study could become a proof of concept that a rehabilitation approach, integrating evidence-based training strategies that engage people with mild AD and their caregivers in using technology, can improve task performance in a home environment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".