Virtual collaborative creative engagement in a pandemic world: creative connection for older adults with lived experience of dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Older adults were disproportionately affected by COVID-19, and isolation and loneliness became key risk factors for mental illness and decreased quality of life. Older adults with lived experience of dementia and their care partners experienced isolation, loneliness, anxiety and depression, already heightened due to social stigma. Reduced access to resources was a notable problem. Objective: (RTC) Project's virtual turn in program delivery during the pandemic, asking "How did virtual collaborative creative engagement (CCE) impact well-being for people living with dementia and their care partners?"; and "What are key elements of RTC's unique virtual CCE approach?" Methods: The study employs reflexive thematic analysis to analyse interviews and focus groups with the project's artist facilitators, researchers, peer collaborators living with dementia, and their care partners. Findings: Themes describe key elements of RTC's unique approach to virtual CCE and include: "Adjusting Expectations and Adapting to Technology"; "Re-imagining Creative Engagement in Virtual Space"; "Sustaining Reciprocal Caring, Learning, and Support"; "Disrupting Stigma and Welcoming a Wider Audience"; and "Supporting Well-being through Empowerment, Community, and Creativity." Discussion: Findings offer new perspectives on how virtual CCE not only has the potential to decrease loneliness and isolation and associated mental health risks for older adults living with dementia and their care partners, but also can work to disrupt stigmatizing representations of dementia, promote inclusion, and enhance citizenship.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".