MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4210451952 · doi:10.1002/alz.056248

At‐homeness: A novel psycho‐socio‐environmental construct for an eMental Health controlled trial to prevent loneliness and cognitive decline among older adults with multimorbidity

2021· article· en· W4210451952 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daniel RY Gan, Habib Chaudhury, John R. Best, Graham D. Rowles, Andrew Wister

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLonelinessConstruct (python library)PsychologySocial isolationDementiaPsychological interventionClinical psychologyUCLA Loneliness ScaleCognitionConstruct validityCognitive declineGerontologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryMedicinePsychometricsDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Approximately two‐thirds of older adults’ experience multimorbidity in Canada and the US. Challenges of symptoms management and reduced mobility often coincide with late‐life depression which is associated with a 2 to 5‐fold increased dementia risk. Loneliness and depression are connected in the prodromal phases. Loneliness is distinct from social isolation and has direct neurological impact on the brain (Cacioppo et al., 2014). Yet, recent umbrella review of RCTs on loneliness reported “limited effects” (Jarvis et al., 2020). Following recommendations for theory‐based non‐pharmacological interventions (Sikkes et al., 2020), this paper develops a novel construct as an antidote to loneliness for eMental Health intervention among MMOA. Method Findings from three sequential studies were combined to examine the preventive potential of a measurable construct. (1) Systematic review identified 28 studies on the experiences people living with dementia in the community. Comparative synthesis was conducted ethnographic data (e.g., in‐depth interviews) since Chaudhury (2001). (2) Primary qualitative data were extracted to generate items for a preliminary scale. Factor analysis was conducted to examine construct validity. (3) An index was constructed using comprehensive data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA). Path analysis was conducted to examine direct and indirect effects on loneliness, depression, and cognition, controlling for baseline. Social environment (e.g., social support) was included for comparison. Result (1) Understanding behavioral symptoms as non‐verbal expressions and employing Deweyan person‐place integration, at‐homeness emerged as a psychological construct that could address prodromal loneliness. (2) Factor analysis (n=212) reduced 28 items to 20 items (α=.920) At‐homeness includes three factors: identity‐stability(α=.886), social experiences (α=.887), self‐expression (α=.767)(SRMR=.075). Convergent validity with neighborhood factors was found (B=.43, p<.001). (3) Measures of housing, neighborhood, and life satisfaction were used. Path analysis (n=15,087) showed good model fit indexes (TLI=.989; CFI=.999; RMSEA=.026; SRMR=.006). At‐homeness (B=‐.20, p<.001) rivals the effect of social environment (B=‐.19, p<.001) on loneliness. Structural equation modelling showed that, together, at‐homeness and loneliness have as much effect on cognition as depression. Conclusion At‐homeness is a promising novel psycho‐socio‐environmental construct to reduce loneliness and cognitive decline among MMOA. Its factors may be influenced through customized activity suggestions. A pilot study is underway.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.319 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicHealth disparities and outcomes→French-language works237,207→