Older adult mistreatment, dementia, and the family caregiver in the Northeastern Ontario home: the influence of context on professional agency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This integrated-article thesis presents the findings of a qualitative critical inquiry with three related aims: to understand the experience of formal care practitioners who encounter mistreatment of an older adult with dementia by their family caregiver in the home; to explain the influences of the domestic, health care, geographical, and socio-political contexts upon that experience; and to facilitate empowerment and collective action to improve policy, practice and care outcomes. Viewing this experience through a Critical Social Theory lens, data collection methods consisted of interviews, reflective journals, and inquiry and action focus groups. Practitioners representing 23 organizations providing care to older adults in their homes in urban and rural Northeastern Ontario participated over the course of two phases of Understanding and Empowerment. In this thesis, Chapter 1 will review the literature, identifying gaps in knowledge and describing the critical theoretical underpinnings, methodology and theoretical thematic analysis which were instrumental to facilitate self-reflection of past cases, critique of socially dominant ideologies and structures, dialogue with other practitioners also encountering these cases, and dialectic reasoning, a process of examining contradictions of what is, versus what should be in cases of older adult mistreatment and dementia. Chapter 2 presents the findings on the experience of practitioners with these cases. More specifically, practitioners described a lack of professional agency defined as the ability to control outcomes and act in a meaningful way in their cases. Next, Chapter 3 examines the home, familial, health care, geographical and socio- political contexts and their influences on professional agency. Those findings describe the oppression of these contexts on practitioners who could not control the outcomes of older adult mistreatment [OAM] within them. Chapter 4 then presents the process of empowerment during which practitioners shared their concerns related to these oppressive contexts and collaborated towards collective action projects to improve policy, practice and outcomes. Chapter 5 situates the significance of the findings within the field of OAM and dementia and discusses cross- cutting themes linking the papers. Limitations of the study will be reviewed as well as recommendations for policy, practice and research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".