Association between environmental stimulation and apathy in nursing home residents with dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Prior research and theories established the link between care environments and apathy. Yet, empirical evidence on how environmental stimulation impacts apathy is lacking. This study examined the association between environmental stimulation and apathy in nursing home residents with dementia. DESIGN: This repeated-measure study analyzed 104 video observations of staff caregiver-resident interactions. SETTING: 12 nursing homes. PARTICIPANTS: 63 unique staff caregiver-resident dyads that involved 42 caregivers and 44 residents with moderate to severe dementia. MEASUREMENTS: Second-by-second behavioral coding using Noldus Observer software was conducted to assess apathy and environmental stimulation, using the Person-Environment Apathy Rating scale. The environment subscale includes six items: stimulation clarity, stimulation strength, stimulation specificity, interaction involvement, physical accessibility, and environmental feedback. The apathy subscale includes six items: facial expression, eye contact, physical engagement, purposeful activity, verbal tone, and verbal expression. Multilevel linear models were used for analysis. RESULTS: Results showed that apathy was not associated with the overall quality of environmental stimulation but was significantly associated with stimulation specificity (coefficient = -2.23, p = 0.049). However, the association was not significant after controlling for resident characteristics (p = 0.082). In addition, higher levels of environmental feedback were associated with lower apathy levels (coefficient = -2.14, p = 0.001). The association remained significant after controlling for resident characteristics (coefficient = -1.65, p = 0.014). CONCLUSION: Findings reveal that when environmental stimulation is individually tailored and prompts engagement, residents are less apathetic. This study highlights the effect of environmental stimulation on apathy. Future research should explore interventions that modify environmental stimulation to reduce apathy and improve dementia care.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".