MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318240349 · doi:10.3138/jcs-2022-0027

Losing Ground during COVID-19: Dementia Caregivers’ Shifting Perceptions of Place

2023· article· en· W4318240349 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Stephanie Mason, Katie Aubrecht

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier UniversityBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaResidenceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicNova scotiaSociologyPerceptionPublic relationsGerontologyPsychologyGeographyPolitical scienceMedicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the wake of COVID-19, Canadian federal and provincial governments implemented gathering restrictions to prevent or limit its spread. These restrictions significantly impacted where Canadians spend their time, how they do so and with whom. Prior to the pandemic, people living with dementia (PLWD) and the family members, friends, and neighbours who support their care already encountered physical, health, and social challenges relating to participation in private and public places. Under pandemic conditions, these challenges were magnified and contributed to differences in the ways community was understood and practiced. A rapid research project in the province of Nova Scotia, Canada, exploring COVID-19-related changes to community-based dementia care supports and services highlighted changes toward places of residence, public places, and virtual settings through interviews with unpaid caregivers of PLWD. Findings demonstrated a shift in activities and experiences associated with places during COVID-19 restrictions and lockdown measures. From what home means to community places and virtual places, this article considers the ways in which COVID-19 restrictions and measures are redefining the meanings and significance of places for unpaid caregivers of PLWD in the province of Nova Scotia in Atlantic Canada.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.010
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian StudiesSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207