Evaluation of the Test Phase of the “Program GIFT in Residence”: Results from a Pilot Participatory Action Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the negative effects on older adults, resident-to-resident aggression (RRA) remains a complex and understudied problem. Few interventions exist that address this issue by promoting goodwill. Using the intervention mapping approach, the evaluation of the test phase of the pilot Program GIFT in private seniors' residences (PSRs) (Quebec, Canada) was conducted through qualitative interviews with 25 residents, 21 staff members, and 4 managers. The results indicate that the program achieved its objectives of promoting goodwill, although the strategies to manage RRA and intervention tools were more difficult to integrate into the PSRs' culture. Obstacles and facilitators were reported. Recommendations were identified to enhance the program's content, promote it more effectively, and ensure long-term sustainability. This research is the first endeavour to develop, test, and evaluate the test phase of a pilot program co-created with residents, staff members and managers of PSRs, aiming simultaneously at promoting goodwill and countering RRA.
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 | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 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".