MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2962886996 · doi:10.1177/1074840719864093

Older Adults and Their Families: An Interactional Intervention That Brings Forth Love and Softens Suffering

2019· article· en· W2962886996 on OpenAlexaff
Lorraine M. Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Nursing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)PsychologySummonsSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When assisting older adults and their families, the most useful family nursing conceptual skill is embracing the belief that "illness is a family affair." This illness belief summons a systemic or interactional focus specifically on relationship communication patterns. Uncovering maladaptive and distressing familial interactions, a family nurse can intervene and offer ideas for more loving and caring interactional patterns. Three brief and one detailed clinical case example, illustrating how to conceptualize interactional patterns and how to intervene, are offered. This article also presents the author's firsthand caregiving experience with its accompanying joys and pitfalls. Despite her decades of clinical practice and professional assistance to numerous elderly families, the caregiving and interactions with her father held no guarantee of being filled with consistent care and love. Although not easily applicable to one's own family, focusing on the interrelationships with the elderly and their families, the embedded interactional patterns become the crucial ingredient to facilitate more satisfying and loving relationships.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family NursingSame topicFamily Support in IllnessFrench-language works237,207