The Impact of eBook Clubs on Apathy Among Long Term Care Residents: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Apathy, prevalent among long-term care facilities (LTCF) residents, diminishes motivation, social interaction, and quality of life. This study explored the impact of eBook clubs as a non-pharmacological intervention to reduce apathy. A convergent parallel mixed-methods design was employed with 20 residents from four LTCF participating in a 3-month program. Apathy was assessed using the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-3A) before and after the intervention, with paired t-tests and Cohen’s d measuring changes. Qualitative insights were derived from semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis. Apathy prevalence dropped from 55% to 35%, and mean scores decreased significantly (1.6–0.9; Cohen’s d = 0.85). Participants highlighted cognitive, emotional, and social benefits, valuing program flexibility and eReaders but noting some preference for physical books. These findings suggest eBook clubs as a scalable, cost-effective strategy for LTCF. Future studies should evaluate its broader applicability and explore culturally tailored implementations.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".