MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2981222927 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2019.06.2916

P2‐508: CAREGIVER‐IDENTIFIED PHASES OF ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE CAREGIVING

2019· article· en· W2981222927 on OpenAlexaff
Kristina M. Kokorelias, Samantha Justina D'Souza, Jennifer Au, Monique A. M. Gignac, Gary Naglie, Nira Rittenberg, Jill I. Cameron

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsBaycrest HospitalInstitute for Work & HealthToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaDiseasePsychologyActivities of daily livingFamily caregiversGerontologyCaregiver burdenGrounded theoryQuality of life (healthcare)Social supportCognitionDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatryQualitative researchSocial psychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Informal (unpaid) family caregivers for individuals with Alzheimer's disease are at high risk for developing cognitive, affective, and physical health consequences. Available caregiver supports and services are inconsistently effective, which may be due to poorly timed delivery within the disease trajectory. While clinical phases of the disease are known, caregiver-identified phases across the disease trajectory are not. Caregiver phases can help us better understand the caregiver experience and can be used to provide timely supports to enable better quality of life for both the caregiver and care recipient. The objective of this study was to determine the caregiver-identified phases of caregiving throughout the Alzheimer's disease trajectory and the corresponding needs for support and information. Constructivist grounded theory (CGT) informed data collection, analysis, and interpretation. 40 spousal and adult children caregivers to persons with Alzheimer's disease (10 husbands, 10 wives, 10 daughters, 10 sons) were purposely recruited and interviewed using a semi-structured interview guide. Sampling was completed when theoretical saturation was achieved. Data analysis was conducted using a constant comparative analysis technique. Participants described the phases of caregiving as initial symptoms, informal diagnosis, assistance with instrumental activities of daily living, community mobility, and assistance with activities of daily living. Support needs corresponded to caregiving phases and included early dementia education, informal and formal social support, and a healthcare professional to help navigate the system of available supports. Caregivers identified 5 distinct phases across the Alzheimer's disease trajectory. They also discussed their core needs for support and how these needs change corresponding to the caregiving phases. Findings can also be used to inform development, evaluation, and implementation of programs and services to meet the changing needs of dementia caregivers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.309
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→