Family Home Caregivers for Elderly people
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Improved economic conditions and standards of living that began around the 1950s have resulted in many structural changes in the Arab world, including significant decreases in morbidity, mortality, and fertility rates (United Nations, 2012). This has significantly altered the age demographic in Qatar and other countries in the region where individuals are living much longer, and the number of people aged 25–64 years have increased. Today, there are a significant number of Qataris (10,756) and nonQataris living in Qatar (18,070) above the age of 60. According to the 2010 census, there were 2,685 Qataris and 3,769 non-Qataris in the 65–69 age group, 2,032 Qataris and 1,605 non-Qataris in the 70–74 age group, and 2,630 Qataris and 1,096 non-Qataris over 75 years of age (Qatar Statistics Authority, 2010). Furthermore, the average life expectancy in Qatar is 79.4 (United Nations, 2012), suggesting that the number of older persons in Qatar is on the rise. Family members are the most common providers of home eldercare. However, recent societal changes have multiplied the pressures faced by family members who are responsible for such care. For example, studies have shown that increased participation of women in the workforce is one factor that significantly impacts the needs of families who care for an elderly member (Schoenfelder, Swanson, Pringle, Meridean, & Johnson, 2000; Dwyer & Coward, 1991). Qatar is no exception. Although extended families are common and filial responsibility is highly valued in Qatar, family eldercare providers might be dealing with significant strain that has the potential to compromise both their own quality of life and that of their elderly relatives. Despite these changes, research on elderly caregiving and the challenges of family elder caregivers in Qatar and the Arab world remains limited. Thus, the objective of the report is to investigate the experiences of elder caregivers in Qatar with a particular focus on the stress and burdens of caregiving, the coping strategies of caregivers, and the benefits garnered from their 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.006 |
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".