A GROUP PSYCHOTHERAPY INTERVENTION SUPPORTING DEMENTIA FAMILY CARERS IN MANAGING WORK-LIFE CONFLICTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Reitman Centre Working CARERS Program (RCWCP) is an evidence-informed, small-group therapy intervention designed for individuals juggling employment and dementia caregiving. A series of research is underway to ascertain its clinical effectiveness, perceived impact, and rural adaptability. Here, we present a qualitative study employing the life-course role identity theoretical framework. In-depth interview data from 30 former RCWCP participants was analyzed using the narrative analysis approach. Findings indicated that the extent to which knowledge and skills acquired from RCWCP may be applied is related to the working carer’s lived experience, which is shaped by gender-role identity, dyadic relationship, and work-life conflicts. Rich narratives also revealed conflicting demands across the roles of employee and carer. Targeted and tailored carer interventions such as the RCWCP can proactively respond to the shifting demographics and needs of this diverse sub-population of dementia family carers. Our findings will guide the national dissemination and adaptation of RCWCP.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".