MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891617264 · doi:10.1093/ageing/afy140.162

221Predictors and Correlates of Caregiver Burden in Memory Clinics

2018· article· en· W2891617264 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rónán Ó’Caoimh, Mareeta Calnan, Ronan O’Toole, Arup Dhar, D. William Molloy

Bibliographic record

VenueAge and Ageing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCaregiver burdenMemory clinicPsychiatryGerontologyDementiaCognitionCognitive impairmentDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Although neuropsychiatric symptoms and individual carer characteristics are associated with caregiver burden, little is known about other contributing factors or whether the stage of cognitive impairment or individual cognitive scores are useful predictors in memory clinics. Methods: Consecutive patients referred to a university hospital memory clinic were included. A consultant geriatrician using DSM criteria determined diagnosis and stage. Caregiver burden was scored using the Caregiver Burden Score (CBS), (modified Zarit), with scores ≥15/30 suggesting burden. Additional caregiver data were obtained from the Quick Memory Check, a caregiver-administered cognitive screen. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Quick Mild Cognitive Impairment (Qmci) screen were scored independently. Results: In total, 344 patients were available. Their median age was 76 years (Interquartile tange ± 11) and 35% were female; One-third (34%) had CBS scores ≥15. Caregivers were significantly younger, (p < 0.001). The CBS weakly correlated with diagnostic category (r = 0.16, p = 0.001) and participant age (r = 0.22, p < 0.001) but had moderate correlation with MoCA (r = −0.54, p < 0.001) and Qmci screen scores (r = −0.60, p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in the age, gender, education and time commitment (spent caring) profiles of carers reporting and those not reporting caregiver burden. Median CBS scores were significantly lower in those with subjective cognitive disorders and mild cognitive impairment than dementia, (X2 = 65, p < 0.001). Caregiver burden (CBS ≥15) was significantly associated with older patient age, impaired function (Barthel Index), established dementia and lower MoCA and Qmci screen scores but not with geriatric depression scale scores. Stepwise logistic regression confirmed age, function and cognitive screen scores as independent predictors. Conclusion: While caregiver burden, measured by the CBS, correlated poorly with the stage of cognitive impairment, it correlated moderately with cognitive screen scores. Caregiver burden can be suspected from patient’s age, function and cognitive scores, which should prompt further assessment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAge and AgeingSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207