MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406196200 · doi:10.1002/alz.089398

Using Podcasts as a Learning Tool to Decrease Stigma and Increase Awareness of the Experience of Dementia

2024· article· en· W4406196200 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kathy Hickman

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media in Health Education
Canadian institutionsAlzheimer Society of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStigma (botany)DementiaPsychologyMedical educationMedicinePsychiatryInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Dementia Dialogue is a podcast produced by the Alzheimer Society of Ontario that provides people with lived experience (people living with dementia and care partners) a way to share their stories with each other and the broader community. Listeners who have dementia and care partners gain insight and strengthen their adaptive skills. Listeners who work with people living with dementia and care partners as well as community members at large, develop an understanding of what it means to live with dementia and how these individuals can be supported, thereby increasing awareness about the experience of dementia and decreasing stigma. A series of Learning Guides utilizing these podcasts have been created to help people with lived experience of dementia as well as others within the community, specifically professionals and volunteers supporting those with dementia and their care partners, to explore the various themes of the Dementia Journey. The Learning Guides describe key points along the dementia journey and use embedded podcast excerpts that demonstrate these themes. Excerpts are followed by reflection/discussion questions targeted to specific learner groups to aid formulation of ideas about what can be learned and how it can be applied in practice to one’s own experience. Learners can engage with the guides through independent self‐study or in group settings with a facilitator. Focus groups and surveys were conducted with people with lived experience, professionals/volunteers and educators to assess utility of the learning guides and explore the potential for development of elearning versions of the learning guides. Delegates will learn about the podcast, learning guides and results from the testing of these.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicSocial Media in Health Education→French-language works237,207→