The Canadian Coalition for Seniors’ Mental Health Canadian Clinical Practice Guidelines for Assessing and Managing Behavioural and Psychological Symptoms of Dementia (BPSD)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, approximately 730,000 people are currently living with dementia. Over 75% will experience behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD). There is a lack of consensus on best practices for the assessment and management of BPSD. In 2024, the Canadian Coalition for Seniors Mental Health (CCSMH) developed a Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) for assessing and managing BPSD, specifically for agitation, depression, anxiety, psychosis, and sexual expressions of potential risk, and deprescribing antipsychotics and psychotropic medications. Development of the BPSD CPG followed the Guideline International Network (GIN)-McMaster Guideline Development checklist. The guideline is intended for people living with dementia, caregivers of people living with dementia, and health-care providers in community, outpatient, inpatient, long-term care, and other residential care settings. Recommendations were informed by a Canada-wide prioritization exercise to identify CPG topics and preferred terms for describing BPSD. A systematic review of existing dementia CPGs, an overview of systematic reviews on assessing and managing BPSD, and systematic reviews of tools for measuring psychosis, anxiety, and depressive symptoms in people living with dementia was undertaken, along with a rapid review of studies of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions for reducing sexual expressions of potential risk in people living with dementia. Guideline panel members voted on recommendation strength and quality of evidence, per the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach. This CPG resulted in 11 good practice statements and 63 guideline recommendations that will inform BPSD best practices in a Canadian health-care context.
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 | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".