Factors Associated with the Quality of Life of People with Dementia and with Quality of Life-Improving Interventions: Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To synthesise current research exploring the factors and interventions associated with the quality of life of people with dementia. BACKGROUND: Dementia is a progressive condition affecting an estimated 40 million people worldwide. The illness has a significant impact on the lives of the persons affected and their loved ones, and may thus impair the quality of life of both. As it progresses, dementia weakens the patients' ability to express their own views about their quality of life and the factors associated with it. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: Electronic database search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Joanna Briggs Institute Library, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), EMBASE, Medic published up to March 2016; and incremental hand search. Review method: Systematic or other kinds of reviews and single studies were included for the review if they met the inclusion criteria. Results: A total of 20 reviews and 7 primary studies were retained for synthesis. Key findings were abstracted and a themes matrix was generated to identify patterns of meaning. The factors associated with the quality of life of people with dementia were sociodemographic factors, factors related to dementia and social and caring environment. Interventions supporting quality of life focused on the activation of people with dementia. Conclusions: This scoping review identified a large body of knowledge exploring the factors and interventions associated with the quality of life of people with dementia. The interventions were heterogeneous and the sample sizes small, which is why more research is needed.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".