MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415092184 · doi:10.1123/japa.2024-0148

Evaluation of a Tailored, Community Dementia Program for the Caregiving Dyad

2025· article· en· W4415092184 on OpenAlexaff
Gwen McGhan, Deirdre McCaughey, Jessica Cyr, Kristin Flemons, Thomas Naested, Michelle Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aging and Physical Activity · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsCentre for Disability Prevention and RehabilitationAlberta Health ServicesMount Royal UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDyadDementiaPhysical activityActivities of daily livingWell-beingCommunity practice

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Community programs tailored to the abilities of people living with dementia have the potential to address declines in physical and cognitive functioning while also making a positive difference in the daily lives of the caregiving dyad (person with living with dementia and their family caregivers). Unfortunately, these programs remain uncommon. METHODS: This study examined the potential of an 11-week tailored, community dementia program with the acceptability and sustainability of the program being evaluated. The program was held for 3 hr twice weekly, with the goal of facilitating social, cognitive, and physical engagement for the person living with dementia as well as providing a respite period and support group for the family caregivers. RESULTS: No significant changes were found for the caregiving dyad; however insightful information was captured during the focus groups with the family caregivers. From the family caregiver focus groups, four main themes emerged: (a) socialization for the caregiving dyad, (b) engagement and routine fostered by the program, (c) change during the program, and (d) benefits of the program for the family caregivers. CONCLUSION: By using a multimodal design and combining social, cognitive, and physical activity components, the program has the potential for being a beneficial nonpharmacological intervention. Since the completion of the study, our community partner has continued to offer the program. Significance/Implications: The program shows promise for being able to be tailored to the abilities and needs of the caregiving dyad as well as being integrated into existing organizational structures of communities.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.367 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aging and Physical ActivitySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207