Innovative Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The theme of this issue of the Innovative Practice Section is how we can improve the sharing of information between all those who are involved in dementia care, whether they are people with dementia themselves, carers, professionals, policymakers, or researchers.The section opens with an account by Marilyn Truscott of the annual Alzheimer's Disease International (ADI) conference in 2002.Marilyn has recently been appointed onto the board of directors for the Alzheimer Society of Canada, the first person with Alzheimer's disease or a related disorder to hold a position on this board.Her vivid and inspiring account underlines the importance of ensuring that people with dementia are able to play a full and active role sharing their experiences across international settings.Marilyn also draws attention to the unevenness in the development of good dementia services, both between different countries and within the same country.Here, one of the difficulties identified most often has been the existence of barriers that prevent the effective coordination of services between different agencies and different health and social care professionals.The second article by Dr Carole Cohen, Professor Neil Drummond and Oliver Tsai, who like Marilyn are based in Ontario, describes the development of a dementia caregiving registry.Their account covers the pilot stages of the project, giving readers a 'taster' of what they hope to achieve and also de men tia d e m e n t i a
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".