MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Testing AREduX with HCPs and Caregivers of People Living with Dementia: A Work in Progress

2024· article· en· W4400526508 on OpenAlexaff
Gabrielle Hollaender, Naida L. Graham, Claire Culver, Eva Peisachovich, Bill Kapralos, Elizabeth Viernes Sombilon, Adam Dubrowski

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaWork (physics)PsychologyGerontologyComputer scienceMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the lack of empathy training programs for healthcare providers (HCPs), our ongoing research is examining empathy and its role in caring for PLWD and as part of this research effort, recently introduced the Augmented Reality Education Experience (AREduX) virtual simulation prototype AREduX utilizes augmented reality to simulate the physical and cognitive symptoms of dementia, aiming to enhance empathy among HCPs and caregivers. Our ongoing research involves five phases, and this paper outlines the outcome of Phase 3: usability testing of the AREduX prototype with end users, including HCPs and caregivers of PLWD, to examine the functionality, clarity of content, ease of use, and user interface. We anticipate that AREduX will contribute significantly to the scientific understanding of empathy development, address knowledge gaps, and offer recommendations for implementing AR in experiential education for HCPs and PLWD caregivers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→