Expanding the conversation: A Person-centred Communication Enhancement Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The intricacy and impact of human communication has long captured the attention of philosophers, scholars and practitioners. Within the realm of care and service provision, efforts to maximize outcomes through optimal person-provider communication have drawn research and clinical focus to this area for several decades. With the dawning of the person-centred care movement within healthcare, and in particular long-term care home and dementia care settings, improvement in care providers' use of person-centred communication strategies and enhancement of relationships between residents, their families and care providers are desired outcomes. Thus, several person-centred care and communication theoretical perspectives have been employed to ground study in this field. However, a comprehensive theoretical position to underpin person-centred communication in dementia and older adult research does not exist to our knowledge. To offer expansion to the theoretical work in this emerging field, a Person-Centred Communication Enhancement Model for long-term care and dementia care is proposed, as well as rationale for its development. This discussion will also provide an overview and critique of the extant philosophies, theories, frameworks and models that have been utilized in the study of person-centred communication within the context of long-term care and dementia care.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".