MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405966597 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igae098.3308

CO-CREATING RESOURCES TO RAISE AWARENESS OF RISKS OF GOING MISSING AMONG PERSONS WITH DEMENTIA

2024· article· en· W4405966597 on OpenAlexaff
Christine Daum, Vanessa Vahedi, Isabella Chawrun, Noelannah Neubauer, Emily Rutledge, Adebusola Adekoya, Antonio Miguel Cruz, Lili Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaBusinessRisk analysis (engineering)PsychologyMedicineDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Persons living with dementia are at risk of getting lost and going missing due to wayfinding challenges. Yet, there are few accessible resources available that raise awareness of the risks of going missing and strategies to manage these risks. The purpose of this project was to develop engaging and informative learning resources for first responders, search and rescue personnel, persons living with dementia, care partners, and health and social care providers. Co-design and co-production approaches guided the development of these resources and were informed by reviews of the academic and grey literature, dialogue with persons with lived experiences, and content analysis of missing person cases. We produced three sets of resources: 1) nine dementia-friendly first responder videos for police and search and rescue personnel to enhance their awareness of dementia and risks of going missing; 2) a toolkit of strategies and resources for persons living with dementia and care partners to reduce the risks associated with getting lost and going missing; 3) eight personas and scenarios that depict contextual factors within missing events that can be utilized by service providers and the public in their interactions with persons living with dementia and care partners. All resources were reviewed by participants through interviews, focus groups, and written feedback to identify essential content and ensure accuracy, relevance, and comprehensibility. These sets of learning resources can elevate awareness and offer practical strategies to support persons living with dementia, care partners, first responders, and service providers.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designQualitative
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 venueInnovation in AgingSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207