Evaluating the Forward with Dementia Campaign in Five Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective:The Forward with Dementia (FWD) project is a dementia awareness campaign that was implemented across five countries. The campaign included components such as websites (in four languages – www.forwardwithdementia.org), webinars, newsletters, and social media posts. This campaign is the fourth phase of a three-year longitudinal mixed methods study with five phases in five countries: Canada (New Brunswick, Ontario, Quebec), Australia, the Netherlands, United Kingdom, and Poland. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the implementation and perceived impact of the FWD websites and campaign in the five participating countries.Methods:The RE-AIM framework (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) was used to guide the campaign evaluation. The evaluation was drawn from Google Analytics, surveys, individual interviews, and report cards. Data collection occurred between September 2021 and May 2022.Results:There were approximately 124,945 page views across all FWD websites during the campaign. Participants of the surveys and interviews reported engaging in a range of campaign activities. They read information about receiving a diagnosis, stories from persons with lived experience in dementia, news, and attended webinars (or watched recording). Most participants rated the information that they read on the website moderately, very, or extremely helpful. In addition, the majority of respondents said that they plan to visit the website again. During the interviews, participants shared that the website was easy to navigate, practical, and that it maintains a positive tone related to dementia. The co-design aspect of the campaign was considered a strength.Conclusion:The findings indicate that the FWD campaign can provide support for people who have recently received a dementia diagnosis and their family or friends. In addition, the campaign may provide health and social care providers with a new source of information and tools to use and share with their clients. These results informed the development of a playbook to guide regions and countries beyond those involved in this project to implement similar initiatives.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".