The Use of a Patient-Centered Relationship Enrichment Training Program to Improve Quality of Life for Caregivers and Survivors of Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Design and Methodology: A patient-centered program was developed to enable caregivers and survivors of stroke to work through lifestyle transformation and challenges associated with often life-altering impact of a CVA. A pilot study, using a qualitative design, investigated outcomes of this educational program. Participants were recruited through support groups, healthcare providers and word of mouth. Four dyads participated in six 2-hour/month group sessions providing discussion, coping/stress management strategies, and communication skills. Sessions focused on promoting self-awareness of attitudes/emotions, re-building relationships and improving quality of life. Caregivers maintained a diary and completed weekly enrichment activities to support self-reflection. Caregiver and facilitator training manuals were developed to promote uniformity of program delivery. Inclusion criteria: 1) survivors of CVA at a minimum mild cognitive level of 19- 20 (Montreal Cognitive Assessment) and 2) caregivers providing primary care to a survivor of CVA living at home. One on one interviews with caregivers explored their perceptions of the program’s impact. Original Data and Results: Qualitative data analysis demonstrated 3 themes: 1) Change in perceived sense of self: Juggling multiple roles 2) Impact of disability- Systemic family disharmony 3) Reframing challenges: On the path towards balance and positive family dynamics. Caregivers expressed belief that change would occur through incremental gains, and that strategies learned could foster improved family relationships/quality of life. Conclusion: This program shows potential to reframe communication barriers, improve quality of life for caregivers and survivors of CVA and ultimately, promote efficient/effective use of healthcare resources. It is recommended a larger study be conducted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".