Identity, relationship quality, and subjective burden in caregivers of persons with dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the current study was to examine the associations between informal caregivers' perception of identity change in their care-partner, the quality of the caregiver/care-recipient relationship, and caregiver burden in a sample of 56 informal caregivers of persons with dementia. Most (96.4%) of the caregivers of persons who received a dementia diagnosis reported a perceived change in the identity of their care-partner. Caregivers' perception of relationship satisfaction was measured with the Burns Relationship Satisfaction Scale for premorbid relationship and current relationship quality, and caregiver burden was measured with the Zarit Burden scale. After controlling for variance due to dementia severity, premorbid relationship satisfaction, and current relationship satisfaction, caregivers' perceived change in the identity of the person with dementia accounted for significant variance in caregiver burden. Using a mediational model, we found support for a direct effect between perceived change in identity and caregiver burden, but we also found support for an indirect effect of relationship quality on the relation between perceived identity change and caregiver burden. The demonstrated model provides an empirically supported theoretical framework for guiding potential research and development of future interventions, which we suggest should emphasize dyads.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".