Influence of Perceived Baseline Contact on the Acceptability of a Personal Contact Intervention Among People Living With Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Living with dementia can be a lonely experience, undermining older adults’ quality of life. Evidence supports that personal contact interventions can address older adults’ loneliness. However, effects have been small to date, and little is known about how one’s perceptions of baseline contact may influence an intervention’s use and effects. The purpose of this study was to explore how baseline contact, as perceived by older adults living with dementia, may be associated with the acceptability of a personal contact intervention. Methods: This descriptive study was a secondary analysis of data that we collected from 15 people living with mild to moderate dementia in a long-term care home who participated in Connecting Today. Connecting Today is a personal contact intervention that involves 30 minutes of scheduled, unscripted interaction between persons living with dementia and a family member, friend or research assistant. Visits occurred for six weeks, face-to-face or by phone. We compared groups that perceived that they had high (i.e., weekly, n=8) versus low (i.e., monthly or unknown, n=7) contact at baseline to explore differences in acceptability. We measured perceived acceptability (adapted Treatment Perception and Preferences Questionnaire) and the amount and reasons reported for missing data and study withdrawal. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data, and proportions and frequencies were compared in tables and charts to explore differences between groups.Results: In visits one and two when there were little missing data, a larger proportion (85.7% to 100%) of low contact participants reported feeling better, that the visits helped them, and that the visits were easy ‘mostly’ or ‘a lot’, as compared to the high contact group (37.5% to 62.5%). Retention and attrition after visit two further supported that Connecting Today may be more acceptable for people with low perceived baseline contact: the majority of missing data (71%) and all study withdrawals were observed in the high contact group. Conclusions: Testing the hypotheses generated in this study about the influence of perceived baseline contact upon acceptability in larger feasibility and effectiveness studies will support development of tailored, theory-based personal contact interventions.
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 | 0.009 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".