Les visites, une facon d'etre, experiences de Franco-Manitobains qui rendent visite a des membres de leur famille dans des etablissements de soins de longue duree = Visiting as a way of being : experiences of Franco-Manitobans who visit family members in long-term care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An ethnographic method was used to investigate the visiting experiences of Franco-Manitobans in two urban long-term care settings. Minimal research has been conducted in Canada to examine the visiting experience of family members. In Manitoba, no literature exists to describe the particular experiences of Franco-Manitobans in long-term care. Ten family visitors and nine residents participated in a focused ethnography to better understand the visiting experience. The data collection involved initial fieldwork, face-to-face interviews with visitors and participant observations with the nine visitor-resident dyads. Symbolic interactionism guided the study which examined what visitors actually did when they visited, determined whether participants differentiated between visiting and caregiving, identified the opportunities and challenges experienced by visitors, and explored the specific experiences of Franco-Manitobans who visit kin in long-term care settings. This study addressed the gap in our knowledge about the experiences of visitors, contributed to our understanding of the major factors associated with visiting in long-term care facilities, and provided insight to the experiences of Franco-Manitoban visitors.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".