Acceptance and Commitment Therapy Tele-Counselling Program With Care Partners of Persons Living With Dementia: A Pilot Feasibility RCT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and potential effect of an acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) tele-counselling program offered by a non-profit organization for care partners of persons with dementia (PWD) in a bilingual rural province. Thirty participants enrolled and one withdrew. Intervention group participants ( n = 14) received 6–8 individual counselling sessions via telephone, videoconference, or text. Control group participants ( n = 15) received two general support telephone calls from Alzheimer Society staff. Results indicated limited recruitment and adherence (completion) feasibility, although acceptability and usability were high. Significant within-group reductions in anxiety and stress symptoms (DASS-21) and burden (ZBI-12) in the intervention group were demonstrated, although the groups were not significantly different post-intervention. ACT tele-counselling may increase care partner access to mental health services, improve symptoms, and alleviate strain on Alzheimer Society staff, though a larger trial is needed with a longer duration, multiple ACT therapists, and additional recruitment efforts. Protocol registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05385458 .
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".