Effects of Developmental Bibliotherapy on Subjective Well-Being of Older Adults Living in Nursing Homes: A Quasi-Experimental Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study sought to create a developmental bibliotherapy material database (DBMD) and examine the effectiveness of developmental bibliotherapy on subjective well-being of older adults living in nursing homes. Based on the reading needs of older adults, we developed a DBMD, which included 327 materials with five themes: Health Care , Current Affairs and Politics , Historical Biographies , Geriatric Culture , and Psychological Adjustment . Fifty-four single materials were randomly selected from the DBMD to perform the intervention. This study used a quasi-experimental, single-group pre-/post-survey approach. Sixty-four older adults participated in the study for 6 weeks. Immediately before and after the intervention, older adults completed the Optimism-Pessimism Scale and Memorial University of Newfoundland Scale of Happiness. There were significant improvements in older adults' optimistic tendency and subjective well-being ( p < 0.05). Reading materials in the DBMD promoted older adults' optimistic attitude toward life, reduced negative emotions, and improved subjective well-being. [ Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services, 60 (7), 15–22.]
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".