MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407680857 · doi:10.2196/55468

Traversing Shifting Sands—the Challenges of Caring for Someone With Alzheimer's Disease and the Impact on Care Partners: Social Media Content Analysis

2025· review· en· W4407680857 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kristian Steen Frederiksen, Julie Hahn-Pedersen, Rebecca Crawford, Ross Morrison, Rose Jeppesen, Lynda Doward, Wendy Weidner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Internet Research · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNovo Nordisk
KeywordsDiseaseSocial mediaContent analysisPsychologyContent (measure theory)Internet privacyGerontologyMedicineSocial psychologyComputer scienceWorld Wide WebSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Social media data provide a valuable opportunity to explore the effects that Alzheimer disease (AD) has on care partners, including the aspects of providing care that have the greatest impacts on their lives and well-being and their priorities for their loved ones' treatment. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this social media review was to gain insight into the impact of caring for someone with AD, focusing particularly on impacts on psychological and emotional well-being, social functioning, daily life and ability to work, health-related quality of life, social functioning, and relationships. METHODS: We reviewed social media posts from 4 sources-YouTube (Google), Alzheimer's Association, Alzheimer Society of Canada, and Dementia UK-to gain insights into the impact of AD on care partners. English-language posts uploaded between May 2011 and May 2021 that discussed the impact of AD on care partners were included and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Of the 279 posts identified, 55 posts, shared by 70 contributors (4 people living with AD and 66 care partners or family members), met the review criteria. The top 3 reported or observed impacts of AD discussed by contributors were psychological and emotional well-being (53/70, 76%), social life and relationships (37/70, 53%), and care partner overall health-related quality of life (27/70, 39%). An important theme that emerged was the emotional distress and sadness (24/70, 34%) associated with the care partners' experience of "living bereavement" or "anticipatory grief." Contributors also reported impacts on care partners' daily life (9/70, 13%) and work and employment (8/70, 11%). Care partners' emotional distress was also exacerbated by loved ones' AD-related symptoms (eg, altered behavior and memory loss). Caregiving had long-term consequences for care partners, including diminished personal well-being, family and personal sacrifices, loss of employment, and unanticipated financial burdens. CONCLUSIONS: Insights from social media emphasized the psychological, emotional, professional, and financial impacts on individuals providing informal care for a person with AD and the need for improved care partner support. A comprehensive understanding of care partners' experiences is needed to capture the true impact of AD.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0150.012
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.251
GPT teacher head0.512
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Internet ResearchSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207