MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6958623823 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.5620352

Needs of patients with dementia and their caregivers in primary care: lessons learned from the Alzheimer plan of Quebec

2021· other· en· W6958623823 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Physics and Python Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaNeeds assessmentThematic analysisSocial needsActivities of daily livingQualitative researchHealth careDescriptive statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Persons living with dementia have various health and social care needs and expectations, some which are not fully met by health providers, including primary care clinicians. The Quebec Alzheimer plan, implemented in 2014, aimed to cover these needs, but there is no research on the effect this plan had on the needs and expectations of persons living with dementia. The objective of this study is to identify persons living with dementia and caregivers’ met and unmet needs and to describe their experience. Methods This is a sequential mixed methods explanatory design: Phase 1: cross-sectional study to describe the met and unmet health and social care needs of community-dwelling persons living with dementia using Camberwell Assessment of Need of the Elderly and Carers’ Assessment for Dementia tools. Phase 2: qualitative descriptive study to explore and understand the experiences of persons living with dementia and caregivers with the use of social and healthcare services, using semi-structured interviews. Data from phase 1 was analyzed with descriptive statistics, and from phase 2, with inductive thematic analysis. Results from phases 1 and 2 were compared, contrasted and interpreted together. Results The mean total number of needs reported by the patients was 5.03 (4.48 and 0.55 met and unmet needs, respectively). Caregivers had 0.52 met needs (3.16 unmet needs). The main needs for both were memory, physical health, eyesight/hearing/communication, medication, looking after home, money/budgeting. Three categories were mentioned by the participants: Persons living with dementia and caregiver’s attitude towards memory decline, their perception of community health services and of the family medicine practice. Conclusions Our study confirms the findings of other studies on the most common unmet needs of the patients and caregivers that are met partially or not at all. In addition, the participants were satisfied with access to care, and medical services in primary practices, being confident in their family. Our results indicate persons living with dementia and their caregivers need a contact person, a clear explanation of their dementia diagnosis, a care plan, written information on available services, and support for the caregivers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicComputational Physics and Python ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207