Decision-Making, Personhood and Dementia : Exploring the Interface
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acknowledgements. Introduction: 1. Decision-making, Personhood and Dementia:Mapping the Terrain. Deborah O'Connor and Barbara Purves. Part I: Conceptualizing the Issues. 2. Narrative and Decision-making. Clive Baldwin, Bradford Dementia Group, UK. 3. Decision-making as Social Practice. Andre Smith, University of Victoria, British Colombia, Canada. 4. Hunting Good Will in the Wilderness. MaryLou Harrigan, University of British Colombia, Vancouver, Canada, and Grant Gillett, University of Otago Medical School, Dunedin, New Zealand. 5. A Confucian Two-dimensional Approach to Personhood, Dementia and Decision-making. Daniel Fu-Chang Tsai, National Taiwan University, Taiwan. 6. Cultural safety, Decision-making and Dementia: Troubling Notions of Autonomy and Personhood. Wendy Hulko and Louise Stern, University of British Colombia, Vancouver, Canada. Part II: Policy and Practice Issues. 7. Decisions, Decisions: Linking Personalisation to Person-centred Care. Jill Manthorpe, Kings College, London, UK. 8. Confronting the Challenges of Assessing Capacity: Dementia in the Context of Abuse. Deborah O'Connor and Martha Donnelly, University of British Colombia, Vancouver, Canada. 9. Capacity, Vulnerability, Risk and Consent: Personhood in the Law. Margaret Isabel Hall, University of British Colombia, Vancouver, Canada. 10. Personhood, Financial Decision-making and Dementia: An Australian Perspective. Cheryl Tilse, Jill Wilson and Deborah Setterlund, University of Queensland, Australia. Part III: Understanding at the Everyday Level. 11. Narrative and Decision-making. John Keady, Manchester, UK, Sion Williams, University of Wales, Bangor, UK and John-Hughes Roberts, Glan Traeth Day Hospital, Wales, UK. 12. Personhood, Dementia and the Use of Formal Support Services: Exploring the Decision-making Process. Deborah O'Connor and Elizabeth Kelson, University of British Colombia, Vancouver, Canada. 13. Families, Dementia and Decisions. Barbara Purves and JoAnn Perry, University of British Colmbia, Canada. 14. The Communicative Capacity of the Body and Clinical Decision-making in Dementia Care. Pia C.Kontos and Gary Naglie, University of Toronto, Canada. 15. Conclusion. Decision-making and Dementia: Toward a Social Model of Understanding. Deborah O'Connor, Barbara Purves and Murna Downs, Bradford Dementia Group, UK. Contributors. Index.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".