A PHENOMENOLOGICAL INQUIRY OF THE EXPERIENCE OF CARING FOR A LOVED ONE RECENTLY DIAGNOSED WITH AMNESTIC MILD COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT There are currently 500,000 people living with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) in Canada. It is estimated that the total costs associated with AD are 15 billion Canadian dollars per year. Informal caregivers across the nation provide an estimated 231 million hours of unpaid care annually. Individuals diagnosed with Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment (aMCI) have the highest rate of conversion to AD, with an average 5-year conversion rate from time of aMCI diagnosis. This study aimed to understand how carers of individuals recently diagnosed with aMCI experience the transition into their new role of care provider and what implications their new role has on carer well-being. To explore the meaning of the experience of caring for a loved one with aMCI, a hermeneutic phenomenological investigation was used. Five carers created a narrative through in-depth interviewing which provided detailed and rich descriptions of their experiences. Data were analysed using van Manen’s methodological structure for human science inquiry. The essence of the experience of caring for a loved one recently diagnosed with aMCI is the need for the carer to wear multiple masks in order to cope with the accumulated multiple losses they suffer as they continually adjust to their new and evolving carer identity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".