MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362458959 · doi:10.1080/13607863.2023.2194848

‘The oxygen of shared experience’: exploring social support processes within peer support groups for carers of people with non-memory-led and inherited dementias

2023· article· en· W4362458959 on OpenAlexaff
Emma Harding, Samuel Rossi-Harries, Shaima Alterkawi, Claire Waddington, Adetola Grillo, Olivia Wood, Emilie Brotherhood, Gill Windle, Mary Pat Sullivan, Paul M. Camic, Joshua Stott, Sebastian J. Crutch

Bibliographic record

VenueAging & Mental Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsNipissing University
FundersEconomic and Social Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchDepartment of Health and Social CareNational Brain AppealUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsPeer supportSocial supportPsychologyContext (archaeology)Coding (social sciences)Support groupExperiential knowledgeSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatrySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To explore support processes and behaviours taking place during online peer support groups for family carers of people living with rare, non-memory-led and inherited dementias (PLWRD). METHODS: Twenty-five family carers of PLWRD participated in a series of ongoing online peer support groups on the theme of 'Independence and Identity'. Transcripts from 16 sessions were analysed using qualitative directed content analysis with a coding framework informed by Cutrona & Suhr's (2004) Social Support Behaviour Code (SSBC). RESULTS: Most of the social support behaviours outlined in the SSBC were identified within the sessions, along with two novel social support categories - 'Experiential Support' and 'Community Support' - and novel support behaviours including 'Advocacy and Collective Action' and 'Uses Humour'. The SSBC code 'Relationship' appeared to be of central importance. CONCLUSIONS: This study sheds light on the unique challenges of the caring context for those affected by non-memory-led and inherited dementias and the significant contributions carers can offer to, and receive from, peers in similar situations. It highlights the importance of services which recognise the value of the informational and emotional expertise of carers of PLWRD and encourages the continued development and delivery of tailored support for these populations.

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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAging & Mental HealthSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207