Projecting a Critique of Stigma Associated With Dementia on Screen: The Impact of a Canadian Film on the Importance of Relational Caring in the Community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Relational caring has the capacity to reduce stigma associated with dementia by shifting the focus from dysfunction and behavior management, to attending to the interdependencies and reciprocities that underpin caring relationships, and making explicit the centrality of relationships to quality care, growth, and quality of life. Education, particularly arts-based approaches, has been identified as a key strategy to decrease stigma. Yet rarely are the arts utilized in educational initiatives, and particularly so in community care settings. With an interest in redressing this, our team evaluated the impact of a Canadian filmed research-based drama-Cracked: new light on dementia-about stigma associated with people living with dementia and their families. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted interviews with family carers of people living with dementia and formal care providers affiliated with community-based dementia care, and also the general public at 3 and 8 months postscreening. RESULTS: Our analysis of participants' perceptions/experiences illustrates the effectiveness of Cracked in reducing stigma by demonstrating changes in the understanding of dementia and changes in practice. Our analysis also includes attention to how the film, as a form of cultural production, deepened engagement and facilitated transformation. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Our evaluation of Cracked demonstrates that it is an effective strategy for decreasing the stigma associated with dementia by promoting relational caring. It also importantly contributes to the theoretical literature that supports film-based approaches to stigma reduction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".