Developing Poetry as a Research Methodology with Rarer Forms of Dementia: Four Research Protocols
Bibliographic record
Abstract
People living with rarer forms of dementia tend to have progressive cognitive symptoms affecting skills other than memory and/or onset before the age of 65 years. They are often misdiagnosed and due to symptom profile or age of onset, do not usually fit well with care pathways designed for older people with typical Alzheimer’s disease or vascular dementia. Although the arts have been increasingly used as interventions to support people with dementia, there is very little attention given to rarer dementia forms in arts and health research or practice. The objective of the present international study seeks to systematically explore four diverse forms of poetry writing within this population through virtual and in-person small and large group formats. Our approach includes investigating poetic processes as methodology through the lens of an arts-based methodological approach in order to explore how poems construct knowledge and a felt experience. We will also use more traditional qualitative approaches to understand the experience of writing, reading and listening to poetry as an intervention that can be used with different rarer forms of dementia. To the best of our knowledge, this will be the first study to explore poetry using multiple research protocols. The results will have implications for methodology development, co-constructed poetic inquiry and multiple opportunities for involving poetry in supporting people with dementia and family members.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | medium |
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 | 0.207 | 0.248 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.004 |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".