MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4305014690 · doi:10.1186/s12877-022-03483-9

Feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of the adapted Namaste Care program delivered by caregivers of community-dwelling older persons with moderate to advanced dementia: a mixed methods feasibility study

2022· article· en· W4305014690 on OpenAlexafffund
Marie‐Lee Yous, Jenny Ploeg, Sharon Kaasalainen, Carrie McAiney, Kathryn Fisher

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Geriatrics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsResearch Institute for AgingUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster University
FundersAlzheimer Society
KeywordsMedicineDementiaGerontologyRehabilitationPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Caregivers have considerable responsibilities in supporting persons in advanced stages of dementia, however they receive little education. Namaste Care is a multisensory program originally designed to be delivered by healthcare providers in long-term care homes for persons with advanced dementia. The program has not yet been adapted and evaluated for use by caregivers of persons with moderate to advanced dementia living at home. The purpose of this feasibility study is to determine the feasibility, acceptability and preliminary effectiveness of the adapted Namaste Care program for use by caregivers of community-dwelling older persons with moderate to advanced dementia. METHODS: This feasibility study, with a one-group before-after design and interviews, was part of a larger study using a multiphase mixed methods design. A total of 12 caregivers delivered the program over three months. Caregivers completed questionnaires on caregiver quality of life, perceptions of caregiving, self-efficacy, and burden at baseline and 3-month follow-up. Caregivers participated in interviews at the 3-month follow-up to explore acceptability and perceived benefit. Descriptive statistics and paired t-tests were used to analyze quantitative data. A secondary analysis used multiple imputation to explore the impact of missing data. Experiential thematic analysis was used in analyzing qualitative data. RESULTS: The adapted Namaste Care program was judged to be feasible, given that all caregivers used it at least twice a week over the 3-month period. The retention rate of caregivers was 83% (10 of 12). Caregivers perceived that the program was practical, enhanced the wellbeing of persons with dementia, and brought them closer in their relationships with persons with dementia. There were no statistically significant changes for quality of life, perceptions of caregiving, self-efficacy, or burden outcomes. Multiple imputation results revealed promising findings for an improvement in caregiver wellbeing related to quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The adapted Namaste Care program for use by caregivers of community-dwelling older persons with moderate to advanced dementia was feasible and acceptable. The program has the potential to enhance the quality of life and other outcomes of caregivers, however there is a need to conduct a larger trial that is adequately powered to detect these effects.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.330 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC GeriatricsSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207