Disruptions in Relational Continuity: The Impact of Pandemic Public Health Measures on Families in Long-Term Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the value of family caregivers' involvement with relatives in long-term care (LTC) is well recognized, tensions remain regarding their role. Such tensions were exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic as strict public health measures restricted family access to LTC homes. Using interpretive description, we examined the impact of visitation restrictions on family caregivers' experiences caring for a relative in LTC between March 2020 and June 2021. In-depth interviews were conducted with 14 family caregivers (five spouses and nine adult daughters) and two key themes were identified. The first theme, "seeking to maintain relational continuity," illustrates how caregivers sought to sustain connections with residents prior to and during the pandemic. The second theme, "disrupted relational continuity," highlights the impact of severed relational connections on caregivers' sense of self and ongoing feelings of loss and anger. Findings call for a trauma-informed approach that recognizes the pervasiveness of trauma for family caregivers and the avoidance of re-traumatization.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".