MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7116853294 · doi:10.1002/alz70861_109017

Assessment of Audio‐Visual and Print Educational Material using PEMAT for Prevention of Dementia: A SMRUTHI, India Initiative

2025· article· en· W7116853294 on OpenAlexaff
Kapil Sharma, Kritika Sharma, Anu Gupta, N Nilima, Hina Narzari, Shubham Gupta, Sakshi Sharma, Kaamini Kashyap, Phaniraj Vastrad, Priya darshanraj N, Sandip Bhattacharjee, Gajraj Singh Shekhawat, Harshath Ajay V, Sandesh J R, Ambika YV, Bijoya Sen, Shalina Jamatia, Priyanka Kumari Meena, Hitesh Tiwari, Shaily Bhushan, Sagar Pm, Ripanjit Singh, Manish Acharjee, Kalpna Sharma, Aishwarya Bhovi, Mailarappa Padiyappa Hooli, Shilpa K, Naveen MR, D. Deb, Pameli Jamatia, Pooja Sharma, Akhilesh Nagar, Tinku Yogi, Rishav Bhatia, R. K. GAUTAM, MA Khan, Vinay Patil, Rajeev Aggarwal, A. Nehra, Subarna Roy, Manish Barvaliya, Subrata Baidya, Shampa Das, P K Anand, Abhik Sinha, Venugopalan Y Vishnu, MV Padma Srivastava

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility
Canadian institutionsCanadian Rural Health Research Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelevance (law)PsychoeducationPopulationQuality (philosophy)Rural population

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: SMRUTHI-India is a multimodal initiative to establish a cohort across four sites in India for randomized controlled interventions to prevent dementia in the at-risk elderly population. Dementia prevalence in India is 7.9%, with higher rates in rural than urban areas. Given the high prevalence, low health literacy, and multicultural context, developing relevant print and audiovisual materials for psycho-education tailored to rural populations is essential. METHOD: The Care Bundle Module (CBM) was developed by a multidisciplinary team at AIIMS, New Delhi focused on the prevention of Dementia in rural population. The CBM Booklet was created and Content Validity Index (CVI) was also calculated based on feedback from five experts. It was then transformed into 10 animated videos in three stages: Pre-Production, Production and Post-Production. To evaluate "understandability" and "actionability" of both the booklet and videos, the Patient Educational Material Assessment Tool (PEMAT) for print (P) and audio-visual (AV) formats was used among 83 (P) and 86 (AV) participants across the sites. Qualitative feedback from the target population and a behavioral expert was also taken and is currently being incorporated into the material. RESULT: The CBM Booklet's S-CVI/Avg was 0.933, indicating 93.3% content validity based on expert ratings. PEMAT understandability scores averaged 96.35% (Print) and 95.46% (Audio-Visual), while actionability scores were 97.90% (P) and 98.75% (AV). PEMAT-based CVI showed strong regional agreement: Himachal Pradesh reported S-CVI/Avg of 0.9802 (P) and 0.993 (AV), Kappa 0.98 and 0.993; Karnataka 0.943 (P) and 0.975 (AV), Kappa 0.94 and 0.97; Rajasthan 0.9828 (P) and 0.9791 (AV), Kappa 0.9829 and 0.979; Tripura 0.9921 (P) and 0.9053 (AV), Kappa 0.9921 and 0.902. These results show high I-CVI and Kappa across regions, confirming excellent content validity and inter-rater agreement. CONCLUSION: The CBM materials demonstrated strong agreement in both experts and target population as reflected in high S-CVI/Avg and Kappa values across regions. PEMAT scores confirmed excellent understandability and actionability in both print and audiovisual formats. These results highlight the relevance and effectiveness of the CBM in delivering dementia-related psychoeducation in rural India.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.087
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.416 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicHealth Literacy and Information Accessibility→French-language works237,207→