Experiences of influencing one's own life when living with working-age dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Having opportunities to make decisions and choices regarding one's life is crucial when living with dementia. This inter-disciplinary study draws on the concept of relational autonomy to explore how working-age people living dementia seek to influence their lives, and what makes it easier or more difficult for them in their everyday life. The data consist of three focus group discussions conducted with 12 retired adults who developed dementia while still employed. The results illuminate various resources that enable a person to (a) handle their difficulties at work and related consequences with dignity, (b) manage everyday tasks and live a fulfilling life, and (c) fight the stigma associated with (working-age) dementia. Challenges related to these aspects reported by the participants reveal gaps and obstacles that impede the full realisation of the rights of people living with early onset dementia. This research highlights the need for workplace education for different stakeholders, equal and ongoing access to guidance and counselling for younger people who live with dementia, and an effort by society as a whole to eradicate stigma.
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 | 0.000 | 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".