MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122884699 · doi:10.1017/s1041610220004019

Evaluation of the Reitman Centre CARERS program for supporting dementia family caregivers: a pre–post intervention study

2021· article· en· W3122884699 on OpenAlexafffund
Joel Sadavoy, Sima Sajedinejad, Mary Chiu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Psychogeriatrics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily Caregiving in Mental Illness
Canadian institutionsOntario Shores Centre for Mental Health SciencesSinai Health SystemUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchConsortium canadien en neurodégénérescence associée au vieillissement
KeywordsDementiaPsychologyCoping (psychology)Clinical psychologyCompetence (human resources)Family caregiversCaregiver burdenGerontologyMedicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: While family caregivers (CGs) of persons with dementia are cost-effective for the health system, this form of caregiving leads to disproportionate vulnerability to physical, mental, and social adverse health consequences among CGs. The study goal was to determine the effect of the Reitman Centre CARERS program on key outcomes in family CGs of people with dementia. The Reitman Centre CARERS program is an innovative, group psychotherapeutic skills training intervention based on integrated problem-solving techniques (PST), simulation learning, and group psychotherapy designed to address each CGs’ unique situation. Design: A quasi-experimental, non-randomized, pre–post evaluation, multiple groups, multisite trial. Setting: Multisite group intervention provided in community agencies and hospital-based locations. Participants: Spousal or adult child family CGs (n = 264) living in the community and providing care to community-dwelling family members with dementia. Measurement: CGs were assessed for depression (CES-D); stress (PSS); burden (12-item SZBI); role overload, mastery, caregiving competence, and role captivity (Perlin scales), coping (CISS – Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations), CG reactions to CR’s memory and behavioral symptoms (RMBPC). Care recipients (CRs) were assessed on basic and complex activities of daily living (Katz and Lawton). Paired t-tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used for statistical analysis of both the whole group and a more compromised subgroup of CGs. Results: For the group as a whole, CGs showed significant positive change on post-intervention outcome measures of stress, depression, burden, competence, role captivity, overload, mastery, coping, and reaction to memory issues. The intervention showed especially robust effect sizes (ES) in more compromised CGs. These positive outcomes emerged despite a significant measured deterioration in CRs’ function. Conclusion: The CARERS program may be an effective multicomponent intervention to improve the well-being, functioning, and coping skills of dementia CGs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score0.732

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational PsychogeriatricsSame topicFamily Caregiving in Mental IllnessFrench-language works237,207