MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Behavioral and Psychological Symptoms of Dementia: A Review of its Management in Sub-Saharan Africa

2025· review· en· W4416061733 on OpenAlexaff
Marian Esther Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Aging Science · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsMiller Group (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaPopulationBehavior managementHealth professionalsHealth carePsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dementia has been highlighted as one of the key diagnoses among elderly people. This study seeks to review the management of behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia in Sub-Saharan Africa. A comprehensive review was carried out with the aid of online research journal websites as well as other in-context articles. While conducting this study, the keywords in the search query were directed towards managing behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia in Sub-Saharan Africa. Areas noted in relation to this study were understanding the effects on management of behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia in Sub-Saharan Africa. It was discovered that 88% of the population of Ghana and 90% of the population of South Africa do not have an idea about dementia. Health professionals in sub-Saharan Africa are not provided with the knowledge they need to take care of dementia patients. There is a high prevalence rate of dementia in Africa, with a probability of having over 200% rate in dementia due to the rise of the older generation. There is a need to address the education of dementia before the management of the behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia can be curbed. Until that is that Africa will constantly be in a cycle of being at the verge of breakthrough in addressing the management of dementia and coming back to the root cause, which is health education.

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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score0.733

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 venueCurrent Aging ScienceSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207