Narrative Care and Engagement in Social and Health Care: Enhancing Identity with a Small Story Approach
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Narrative care, an approach developed from the larger concept of narrative gerontology, considers the importance of stories as a source of identity. A type of person-centered care, narrative care in care settings encourages care workers to elicit stories to gain a more wholistic understanding of the person. Drawing on personal experience in the field, I argue that although “big” story approaches (e.g., grand life narratives) have typically been used in social and healthcare settings, “small” story approaches (e.g., snippets or moments) are more practical for care workers. The expansion of the concept of narrative care to include “narrative engagement” will be explored, which if applied in meaningful ways can promote citizenship, shift power dynamics, generate empowerment, and create systemic change in social and health care settings. Finally, newly developed train-the-trainer narrative care training will be discussed, which is designed to meet the needs of diverse social/health care workers, with a focus on meaningful methods of adopting narrative care and engagement in practice.</p>
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it