Qualitative Evaluation of Family Caregivers’ Experiences Participating in Knowledge and Interpersonal Skills to Develop Exemplary Relationships (KINDER): Web-Based Intervention to Improve Relationship Quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The onset of Alzheimer disease and related dementias (AD/ADRD) can alter relationships between family caregivers and persons living with AD/ADRD, such as through the occurrence of distressful behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia. Poorly perceived relationship quality by caregivers contributes to negative outcomes for both care partners, such as low-quality caregiving and potential mistreatment of older adults. Knowledge and Interpersonal Skills to Develop Exemplary Relationships (KINDER) is a new, web-based, asynchronous psychoeducational intervention with content informed by focus groups with family caregivers. The program was developed to prevent low-quality caregiving and potential mistreatment of older adults by focusing on building healthy caregiving relationships. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to describe caregivers' experiences participating in KINDER to understand intervention acceptability. Of particular interest was learning how comfortable caregivers were viewing content addressing potential mistreatment, as well as whether asynchronous delivery created any barriers to participating in the intervention. Findings will inform future program refinements before efficacy testing. METHODS: Although 23 caregivers enrolled in the KINDER parent study, only 7 of them completed the 8-week intervention. In-depth, semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with all participants who completed the program to understand their experiences while attending KINDER and to decipher barriers to participation. We also asked participants about which program elements were most valuable and which were least valuable to them, as well as how the program could be improved. Interview transcripts were analyzed by 2 coders using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Our findings indicate that caregivers were overall satisfied with KINDER's focus and content. Participants particularly liked how KINDER materials felt authentic and relevant to supporting healthy care relationships (Theme 1). The program's multiple components were found to be valuable, especially story-based video vignettes and readings (Theme 2). Most caregivers were comfortable viewing depictions of mistreatment and understood the importance of this content (Theme 3). Notably, while caregivers appreciated the convenience of participating in an asynchronous web-based intervention, several expressed a desire for more opportunities to speak with other caregivers (Theme 4). Technology challenges, such as a lack of clarity about automated intervention activities, deterred completion. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study suggest an asynchronous web-based intervention covering sensitive topics such as mistreatment is acceptable for at least some AD/ADRD caregivers. Caregivers' comments that materials felt authentic may suggest that the integration of caregiver voices before intervention development enhanced the relevance of content. To make KINDER easier to deliver and participate in, the investigators plan to reduce the use of automation and integrate more group-based programming, as recommended by participants. Further, given the higher-than-expected dropout rate, in future studies, the investigators will collect data to determine the reasons for participants not completing study activities.
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 | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".