Assessing Determinants of Perceived Quality in Transitions for People with Dementia: a Prospective Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The trajectory of dementia through time is characterized by common transitions which are difficult for persons with dementia (PWDs) and their families and friends. Our study sought to identify determinants for the quality of transition outcomes. METHOD: A 24-month, prospective, longitudinal design identified specific transitions as they occurred in 108 person-with-dementia/caregiver dyads, and assessed the perceived transition quality from the perspective of the caregiver and what we denote as the 'summative' transition quality outcome variable (as explained in the Data Processing section under Methods). RESULTS: Among caregivers and during the authors' deliberations of the summative transition quality outcomes, good transition quality was associated with the PWD's baseline Disability Assessment for Dementia (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02-1.06 per increase in percent score based on summative assessments), and with the PWD's higher baseline quality of life scores (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.05-1.18 per increase in unit of score in QOL-AD based on summative assessments). Caregiver-perceived better outcome quality was associated with lower caregiver burden, (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95-0.99 per unit CBI score increase). CONCLUSION: Identifying determinants of successful transitions is feasible and may be translated into practical guidance for use in clinical encounters. Those with worse prior quality of life or worse performance in activities of daily living appear to require specific support during transitions, as do those whose caregivers report higher levels of burden.
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".