Continuity, change and care: a sense of self in a residential care home
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper draws on findings from an international study of promising practices in care homes: Reimagining long-term residential care: an international study of promising practices. Across all six countries in the study, the maintenance of personal identity, regarded as important to avoiding institutionalisation, is a core feature of the approach to care in the homes studied,. Encouraging residents to bring with them cherished possessions, such as photographs and ornaments, and displaying memory boxes for people with dementia can be understood as strategies to achieve this aim. At least in part, these practices reinforce a backward facing view of personal identity – that identity is what the resident has done and been prior to moving into the home. Less well understood is the potential of care to enable personal development and change. This study has identified approaches to care that have such potential. Underpinning these is a more fluid conceptualisation of personal identity in which a continuing sense of self can be maintained, including in people with dementia (Kontos and Naglie 2007). This conceptualisation requires attention to emotional and sensory as well as cognitive dimensions of identity. Kontos, P. and Naglie, G. (2007). ‘Expressions of personhood in Alzheimer’s disease’: An evaluation of research-based theatre as a pedagogical tool. Qualitative Health Research 17(6): 799–811.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.039 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".