MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413257966 · doi:10.2196/72147

Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviors Related to Dementia Prevention and Caregiving Among Korean Americans (the KIMCHI Project): Pre- and Posttest Evaluation Study

2025· article· en· W4413257966 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Van Ta Park, Bora Nam, Daren Huang, Stacy Yun, Nicole Phan, E Lee, Hye‐Won Shin

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Aging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of HealthPatient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
KeywordsDementiaGerontologyPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Many Korean American older adults have limited English proficiency, have low socioeconomic status, and are immigrants. The availability and accessibility of linguistic and culturally appropriate dementia-related health care and caregiving resources for this population are limited. This is concerning given that Korean American older adults are a rapidly growing population, and Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD) represent a significant public health issue. Objective We aimed to assess changes in pre- and posttest knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding ADRD prevention and caregiving among participants in the Koreans Invested in Making Caregivers’ Health Important (KIMCHI) before and after their participation in KIMCHI workshop presentations. Methods A community engagement dissemination project, KIMCHI, was developed by academic and community partners to culturally and linguistically tailor selected evidence-based research from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute for Korean American older adults, caregivers, and other stakeholders. Dissemination activities were conducted in-person (as workshops) and on digital platforms. Through partnerships with 1 academic institution and 2 community organizations that serve Korean Americans, 211 participants participated in the KIMCHI in-person workshop presentations, and 134 participants participated asynchronously online (via fact sheets on the project website, YouTube videos, and other social media, such as Facebook and X [formerly known as Twitter]). Pre- and postparticipation tests on knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors for ADRD and caregiving were conducted with workshop participants. We administered satisfaction surveys to all participants (workshop and online) and conducted two-tailed paired-sample 2-tailed t tests to assess mean changes in the pre- and postparticipation tests. Results Among the workshop participants (N=211), most (114/204, 55.9%) were older adults (mean age 69, SD 12.1 y; range 24-90 y), female (n=148, 70.1%), and foreign-born (n=203, 96.2%). Many reported having limited English proficiency (167/211, 79.1%). Significant changes were observed in posttest ADRD knowledge (mean 11.51, SD 2.64), attitudes (mean 7.13, SD 2.83), and behaviors (mean 8.88, SD 2.72) compared to pretest scores (knowledge: mean 10.34, SD 2.67; t210=1.17; P<.001; attitudes: mean 6.33, SD 2.44; t210=0.8; P<.001; and behaviors: mean 8.11, SD 2.68; t210=0.76; P<.001). Workshop participants reported high satisfaction (196/209, 93.8%) with KIMCHI, with the workshop presentations being perceived as culturally relevant and applicable (196/209, 93.8%). Most workshop participants expressed interest in learning more about ADRD-related health topics (186/209, 89%). Similarly, the online participants (N=134) expressed high satisfaction (115/134, 85.8%) and agreed that the topics and content were culturally relevant and applicable (116/133, 87.2%) and learned new information (110/134, 82.1%). Conclusions The findings indicate that KIMCHI may have a positive impact on improving ADRD knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors among Korean Americans. Academic-community collaborations should continue to culturally tailor the programs and studies to help ensure greater representation of Korean Americans in research and community engagement projects.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.392 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR AgingSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207