Analysis of family stigma and socioeconomic factors impact among caregivers of patients with early- and late-onset Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To the best of our knowledge, there are no research studies about socioeconomic factors, family stigma, and their psychological impact on early-onset dementia caregivers. We assessed the impact of family stigma and socioeconomic factors on psychological outcomes, quality of life (QoL), and caregiver burden among 150 caregivers of patients with early-onset Alzheimer's disease due to E280A mutation in presenilin 1 (EOAD), frontotemporal dementia (FTD), and late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD). Caregivers of patients with EOAD presented a higher frequency of socioeconomic risk factors. Caregivers of FTD presented higher levels of family stigma and a higher prevalence of negative outcomes. We found family stigma to be a more suitable predictor of all outcomes. After adjusting for the type of dementia, dementia stage and behavioral changes, and caregiver age and education, family stigma was the most important factor associated with a higher risk of caregiver burden and a reduction in QoL in terms of energy fatigue and emotional wellbeing among early-onset dementia caregivers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".