Cultural Adaptation and Evaluation of the Namaste Care Program for Home-Dwelling People With Dementia and Their Caregivers : Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The Namaste Care program is a person-centered intervention that has been shown to improve the quality of life of people with dementia and to alleviate caregiver burden. However, its application in China remains underexplored. Given China's unique sociocultural norms, cultural adaptation is essential to ensure feasibility, acceptability, and contextual fit. Objective: The primary objective is to culturally adapt the Namaste Care Home Program to the Chinese community context. The secondary objective is to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the adapted program (qualitative analysis), and to explore its preliminary effects (quantitative analysis) on quality of life and related outcomes for people with dementia and their family caregivers. Methods: A 3-stage, 11-step mixed methods design is used in this study. The process includes a baseline stage for community assessment and stakeholder consultations, a formulation stage for adapting the intervention and training materials, and an execution and evaluation stage in which trained family caregivers deliver the intervention. A 1-group, pretest-posttest design will be used, with quantitative assessments at baseline (T0), immediately after intervention (T1), and at the 3-month follow-up (T2), complemented by qualitative process evaluations. Results: The study was approved in April 2025 (2025-NZY-4-01) and registered on April 18, 2025 (ChiCTR2500101042). Recruitment occurred from January to April 2025, enrolling 15 caregiver-people with dementia dyads. As of April 2025, baseline data collection is complete, and analysis is ongoing. Primary results are expected in mid-2026. Conclusions: The cultural adaptation of the Namaste Care Home Program is a critical step toward advancing person-centered, home-based dementia care in China. Findings will provide evidence on feasibility and cultural appropriateness and will inform the design of future large-scale trials to test effectiveness in cross-cultural settings.
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 | 0.057 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.006 |
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".