Increasing Meaningful Occupation for Women Who Provide Care for Their Spouse: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Caregiving for a loved one can be difficult and negatively affect health and quality of life. This pilot mixed-method study explored an intervention to increase participation in meaningful occupation for women who care for their spouse. Participants completed the World Health Organization Quality of Life: Brief Version (WHOQOL-BREF) and Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). The 4-week intervention consisted of an activity log (Daily Experiences of Pleasure, Productivity, and Restoration Profile) and a reflective journal (Journal of Activities and Experiences). Researchers analyzed data from the reflective journal using content analysis. Preliminary findings showed an increase in the physical health domain ( p < .05), and satisfaction with meaningful activities had clinical significance. Qualitative themes included caregiving is a demanding role, writing down experiences helped caregivers take action, and caregivers reorganized daily activities. Although preliminary results showed a positive trend, the intervention was brief, and more research is needed to determine whether greater gains are possible, and can be sustained.
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 | 0.019 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".