Graphic medicine as relational practice in dementia care: Comics, affect and immediacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Poster presentation at the Western North-Western Region Canadian Association of Schools of Nursing (WNRCASN) conference, Edmonton, Canada (February 20-22, 2019).\n Relational practice is woven through most nursing curriculums but finding engaging and innovative ways to integrate it into courses is challenging. Our project uses visual art to integrate relational practice into nursing education. Pedagogies like relational inquiry emphasize contextual learning and the uniqueness of individual lived experiences (Hartrick, Doane & Varcoe, 2015). Narrative is a relational methodology that shares emotions and experiences with learners, but prose narratives can be just more text in a pile of text, unable to distinguish themselves from other, more technical, course readings. Visual art, meanwhile, offers immediacy and identification and so can better provide context and emotional layers to peoples’ experiences. For several years now, practitioners and patients have been exploring graphic medicine, the use of comics to support a relational perspective (Williams, n.d.). Our project explores the narratives of professional care givers in their experience of people with dementia, often their own family members. These narratives are being transformed into a comic resource for students who will one day be caring for people with dementia. The comic, I Know How This Ends , is based on the literary form of classical tragedy with its emphasis on inevitability and caregiver stratagems to forestall it. Comics have allowed us the ability to explore emotions like frustration, resentment, and hopelessness in a way that words alone could not. They have also helped us highlight the relational dynamics between people with dementia, their family members and their care givers, specifically around control and power (or loss of control and power). Our talk will argue the efficacy of comics art as a pedagogical strategy for improving relational practice. \n\n References \nHartrick Doane, G. & Varcoe, C. (2015). How to nurse? Relational inquiry with individuals and families in changing health and healthcare contexts. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins.\nWilliams, I. (n.d.). Why “Graphic Medicine”? Retrieved from https://www.graphicmedicine.org/why-graphic-medicine/
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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".