MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3029229050 · doi:10.1001/amajethics.2020.550

On Seeing and Being Seen in Dementia Care

2020· article· en· W3029229050 on OpenAlexaff
Kathryn Hominick

Bibliographic record

VenueThe AMA Journal of Ethic · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmpathy and Medical Education
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Health Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaPsychologyMedicineInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reflects on one health care professional's experience of sitting for Mark Gilbert's arts-based Patient and Caregiver Portraiture study.The author, a clinical social worker, discusses the roles of ageism, invisibility, and stigma in the lives of people with dementia.This article also explores the similarity between the process of an artist seeing the entirety of a scene and the process of a clinician assessing a patient; both artist and clinician are powerfully influential in their capacity to represent the personhood of a subject or patient.Artist-in-Residence Program When artist Mark Gilbert asked that I, a health care professional, reserve an hour in my workday to sit for a life-sized portrait as part of his art-based study on dementia and caregiving, it was not as unusual an "ask" as one might think.For the Geriatric Ambulatory Care/Memory Disability Clinic, part of the Nova Scotia Health Authority (formerly Capital Health), with which I am affiliated, is like a small gallery of local artists' large oil paintings and sculptures on themes of memory and dementia.This is the result of an artist-in-residence (AIR) program, 1 a scholarship program in which artists help assess patients' memory with families and clinicians and create works that represent what they saw, heard, and felt during that encounter.The AIR program was inspired by a somber oil painting, Ghost, by Jennifer Hiscox, whose father had early onset dementia.This painting hangs outside my office door and is visited and discussed regularly by people passing by.Ghost is based on a photograph of Hiscox as a young girl; she is in a wading pool and a father figure is scratched out.The photo, taken prior to her father's diagnosis, shows him looking at Jennifer "like fathers should look at daughters."Hiscox, feeling not quite able to capture this moment, obscured his image to represent her father as a ghost. 2 In what follows, I consider the roles of invisibility, ageism, and stigma in the lives of people with dementia and explore similarities between the process of an artist seeing the entirety of a scene and the process of a clinician assessing a patient.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0280.037
Scholarly communication0.0110.012
Open science0.0020.017
Research integrity0.0070.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe AMA Journal of EthicSame topicEmpathy and Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207