MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310612930 · doi:10.5770/cgj.25.603

A Novel Instrument for Caregivers in Managing Neuropsychiatric Symptoms of Dementia: Baycrest Quick-Response Caregiver ToolTM *

2022· article· en· W4310612930 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Robert Madan, Marsha Natadiria, Anna Berall, Anna Santiago, Kenneth Schwartz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geriatrics Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health NetworkBaycrest HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
KeywordsDementiaMedicineFamily caregiversCaregiver burdenCaregiver stressHealth careNursingPsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: (BQRCT) was developed to provide caregivers with an online tool that can be used in real time to recognize and manage their emotions when managing neuropsychiatric symptoms of dementia. Methods: A mixed-methods approach was used to evaluate the feasibility of this new tool. Family caregivers of persons with dementia received education about managing neuropsychiatric symptoms of dementia through the online tool. Caregiver demographic information and feedback about the tool was obtained through telephone and online surveys. Health-care providers accessed the tool and also provided feedback. Results: The 21 caregivers who completed the study found the tool helpful and reported high feasibility that included being able to access, complete, and implement the strategies presented in the tool. The 18 health-care providers found the tool useful and most would recommend it to peers and clients. Participants also provided specific suggestions for improvement, such as including more examples of complex behaviours. Conclusions: This tool adds to and complements existing strategies for managing neuropsychiatric symptoms of dementia. Its accessibility through the online platform is especially useful for caregivers who are unable to seek help in person, and for health-care providers and caregivers seeking additional resources.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geriatrics JournalSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207