MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312104393 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igac059.1604

DEMENTIA-RELATED STIGMA IS ALIVE AND NOT WELL AMONG UNREGULATED HOME CARE WORKERS

2022· article· en· W4312104393 on OpenAlexaff
Marie Y. Savundranayagam, Shalane Basque, Audrey Gruneberg

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Competency in Health Care
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaStigma (botany)Prejudice (legal term)PsychologySocial distancePsychiatrySocial psychologyClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Dementia-related stigma is pervasive despite the growing rates of dementia globally. The social cognitive model of stigma contends that stigma is created and maintained through negative stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination towards people who belong to a group. Research on dementia-related stigma highlights the prevalence of stigmatizing views among formal care providers. However, little is known about how stigma is created and maintained by the ways in which frontline care providers talk about persons living with dementia. Accordingly, this study aimed to identify ways in which stigmatizing language is used by home care workers when describing routine care interactions with clients living with dementia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 30 unregulated home care workers, who shared their experiences caring for clients with dementia. We used conventional content analysis to identify themes related to dementia-related stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination. Under stereotypes, persons with dementia were portrayed as objects, infants, not engaging, and cognitively and behaviorally unstable. Under prejudice, persons with dementia invoked pity, fear, disdain, and emotional fatigue. Under discrimination, participants shared experiences of excluding/ignoring, controlling, and using patronizing communication with persons living with dementia. Uncovering common examples of stigmatizing language offers opportunities to train home care workers to use person-centered communication. It is noteworthy that stigmatizing language emerged, when not asked about directly. Our findings underscore the persistence of dementia-related stigma and the need for training to eliminate stigma.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designQualitative
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicCultural Competency in Health CareFrench-language works237,207