Sources of Caregiving Burden in Middle-Aged and Older Latino Caregivers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify sources of caregiver burden in middle-aged and older Latino caregivers of people with Alzheimer disease and related dementia (ADRD). METHODS: Participants were recruited through an agreement with the Rush Alzheimer's Disease Center Clinic Data Repository. We conducted semistructured interviews with 16 middle-aged and older Latinos who were the primary caregiver for a family member diagnosed with ADRD. The interview guide consisted of questions and probes to capture participants' perceptions of family caregiving. Direct content analysis was performed. RESULTS: Participants were aged 50 to 75 years (n = 16) and a majority female (n = 12). The sources of burden identified were (1) caregiver responsibilities, (2) caregiving-related health decline, (3) lack of support, (4) financial status, (5) vigilance, and (6) concerns about the future. CONCLUSIONS: The influence of gender roles seemed to play a role in caregivers' perceptions of sources of burden, especially on caregiver responsibilities and perceptions of lack of support. Latinos cultural values such as familismo and marianismo likely reinforced gender disparities in family caregiving.
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 | 0.000 | 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".