Walking the talk for dementia: A unique immersive, embodied, and multi‐experiential initiative
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coping with dementia requires an integrated approach encompassing personal, health, research, and community domains. Here we describe "Walking the Talk for Dementia," an immersive initiative aimed at empowering people with dementia, enhancing dementia understanding, and inspiring collaborations. This initiative involved 300 participants from 25 nationalities, including people with dementia, care partners, clinicians, policymakers, researchers, and advocates for a 4-day, 40 km walk through the Camino de Santiago de Compostela, Spain. A 2-day symposium after the journey provided novel transdisciplinary and horizontal structures, deconstructing traditional hierarchies. The innovation of this initiative lies in its ability to merge a physical experience with knowledge exchange for diversifying individuals' understanding of dementia. It showcases the transformative potential of an immersive, embodied, and multi-experiential approach to address the complexities of dementia collaboratively. The initiative offers a scalable model to enhance understanding, decrease stigma, and promote more comprehensive and empathetic dementia care and research.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".