The influence of Latino cultural values on the perceived caregiver role of family members with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives We explored how Latino cultural values play a role in perceived caregiving experiences.Design We conducted a qualitative study that used individual, in-depth, semi-structured interviews with middle-aged and older Latinos who were primary caregivers of family members with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias (ADRD). The interview guide consisted of questions about participants’ perceptions of family caregiving and interrelationships between the caregiver and care recipient. The interviews were recorded, translated, and transcribed verbatim. We performed direct content analysis.Results Participants were caregivers, 50–75 years old (n = 16), and the majority were female. We identified four cultural values that were salient to participants’ caregiving experiences: (a) familismo, (b) fatalismo (c) marianismo, and (d) machismo.Conclusion Latino cultural values influenced the role of caregiving and caregiving roles of family members with ADRD. Future research should consider these values as they affect different familial and health dynamics.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".