MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2765879860 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2017.07.462

[O4–08–03]: ACCEPTABILITY OF THE ‘RECLAIMING YOURSELF’ WRITING INTERVENTION FOR BEREAVED SPOUSES OF PERSONS WITH DEMENTIA

2017· article· en· W2765879860 on OpenAlexaff
Shelley Peacock, Kirstian Gibson, Melanie Bayly, Genevieve Thompson, Megan E. O’Connell, Lorraine Holtslander, Chloe Shindruk

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpousePsychologyFeelingDementiaIntervention (counseling)PsychosocialPsychological interventionGriefDocumentationPsychotherapistPresentation (obstetrics)Clinical psychologySocial psychologyPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Caregivers of persons with dementia are among those in the greatest need for support in bereavement (Jones, 2010) and they desire support after the death of their relative (e.g., Peacock, 2013; Shanley, Russell, Middleton, & Simpson-Young, 2011; Treloar, Crugel, & Adamis, 2009); despite this, there is a dearth of research on the development and effectiveness of bereavement interventions. To address this gap, the researchers developed a self-administered, psychosocial writing intervention to support bereaved spouses of persons with dementia (Peacock et al., 2016). The purpose of this presentation is to share the experiences of bereaved spouses who have used the Reclaiming Yourself tool. Twelve newly bereaved spouses (as part of a larger, multi-phase mixed methods study developing and evaluating the effectiveness and acceptability of the Reclaiming Yourself tool) participated in a semi-structured interview after using the tool for a one month period. Utilizing Thorne's (2008) interpretive description approach, interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed to explore the acceptability of the tool. Two men and ten women with an average age of 77.5 years and bereaved for an average of 9.75 months participated in an interview to share their experience with the tool. Analysis of the transcripts revealed three salient themes which captured participants’ perceptions of how the tool can facilitate bereavement: (a) recalling favourable memories of their spouse; (b) helping them to reflect on their feelings and progress; and (c) the act of writing itself as catharsis, reflection, and documentation. Participants readily shared that they could relate to the experiences and content presented in the tool, increasing its perceived acceptability. Although most participants reported that they felt the tool was invaluable in assisting them in their bereavement, several participants spoke at length about their experiences of grief pre-bereavement and the need for support tools during this time. Participants found the tool helpful and were grateful for the opportunity to reflect on their bereavement. The Reclaiming Yourself tool is a convenient, self-administered, and cost effective intervention that has the potential to support spouses and begin to address the lack of effective interventions for bereaved dementia caregivers.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→