Examining the Perceived Effects of an Adult Day Program for Individuals With Dementia and Their Caregivers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Currently 564 000 Canadians are living with dementia, and this number is expected to rise significantly in the next 15 years. Many individuals with dementia use adult day programs; however, contradictory evidence exists as to the effects that adult day programs have on individuals with dementia and their caregivers. PURPOSE/AIMS: The purpose of this study was to examine the perceived effects that an adult day program had on individuals with dementia and their caregivers, from the perspective of care providers at an adult day program. DESIGN: A qualitative research design was used to guide this study. METHODS: One-on-one semistructured interviews were completed with all of the adult day program care providers (n = 7). Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: The adult day program care providers identified several benefits of adult day programs for individuals with dementia and their caregivers. Two themes emerged, including (1) the role of care providers and (2) time to breathe. CONCLUSIONS: Adult day programs have the potential to benefit caregivers and care recipients. Other community support programs may be able to use the knowledge gained from this qualitative study to implement strategies into existing adult day programs to provide support for care recipients and 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".