Technology-Supported Group Activity to Promote Communication in Dementia: A Protocol for a Within-Participants Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Computer Interactive Reminiscence and Conversation Aid (CIRCA)is an interactive conversation support for people living with dementia. CIRCA facilitates one-to-one conversations and caregiving relationships in formal care environments. Originally developed as a standalone device, a new web-based version of CIRCA has been created to increase availability. The potential of CIRCA to support group activities and conversation between people living with dementia and a facilitator has not previously been explored. The two objectives of this study are (i) to validate the new web-based version of CIRCA against the original standalone device, and (ii) to explore the efficacy of CIRCA in supporting group activity for people with dementia in a formal care setting. This mixed-methods study comprises two parts: (i) an eight-session group activity using the CIRCA stand-alone device, and (ii) an eight-session group activity using the web-based CIRCA. One hundred and eighty people with dementia will be recruited: 90 for part (i) and 90 for part (ii). Measures of cognition and quality of life will be taken at the baseline, post-CIRCA intervention, and three months later, plus video recordings of the group sessions. Both parts of the study will be completed by June 2018. The study will provide evidence on two issues: (i) a validation of the new web-based version of CIRCA, and (ii) the suitability of CIRCA to support group activities in formal care settings for people living with dementia. This protocol is an extended version of the short paper presented at the AAATE 2017 conference and published in Studies in Health Technology & Informatics.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it