Older adults' experiences of community mobility following driving retirement: An occupational justice perspective
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objectives: Increase understanding of the implications of the loss of the occupation of driving on the ability to engage in other important and desired occupations. Discuss the occupational justice issues associated with currently available community mobility options. Raise awareness of broader contextual issues that influence older adults’ ability to access public transportation options. \nStudy Purpose: Driving retirement, particularly when not chosen or planned, results in negative consequences for an older adult, including limitations to or loss of participation in important occupations as a result of the inability to be mobile in his/her community. The purpose of this inductive study was to explicate the barriers in transitioning to community mobility options by older adults who had recently retired from driving and who were expected to rely on public transportation as their primary means of mobility and participation. The conclusions drawn from this work are interpreted from an occupational justice perspective and shed light on taken for granted issues required to participate in new or unfamiliar occupations.\nMethods: Three focus groups were held to elicit the experiences of 14 older adults who had to adopt public transportation in a medium-sized, Canadian city. Data were analyzed by researchers using an iterative process to identify constraints in using public transportation. Three stages of iterative analysis included an identification of initial themes through dialogic reflection, formal analysis of independent coding and final review of themes by a third team member who confirmed the analysis of themes.\nResults: Key themes, that rendered constraints in transitions to public use and adoption of community mobility options, were: 1) personal experience of loss of the driver’s license, 2) barriers and enablers of public transportation use (personal, contextual, financial) and 3) strategies that enable public transportation use (personal, community, legislative). Barriers and enablers of public transportation use included: 1) lack of previous knowledge and confidence in using public transportation, 2) accessibility challenges due to cost and scheduling, and timing to get on/off bus, 3) the unanticipated influence of transit operators in hindering or enabling confidence, and 4) the unexpected physical environmental constraints such as the geographical landscape and climatic conditions such as a lack of snow removal that render mobility as impassible.\nImportance to Occupational Science: Exploration of authentic experiences in using public transportation revealed key insights into potential injustices for seniors who no longer drive. Transitioning toward public transportation requires purposeful consideration of strategies beyond individual physical and cognitive capacity and point to broader societal issues of geographical location, climate, transit operators’ awareness of needs of seniors and availability of community supports such as coaching and mentoring.\nDiscussion Questions: Community mobility is a right. What does this assumption mean to older adults with limited access to a private vehicle? What are the capacity and resource assumptions that limit an older adult’s ability to transition to the use of public transportation and how do these contribute to occupational injustice? What is the influence of place on community mobility of older adults who no longer drive? What are the contributions of occupational science concepts to the development of sustainable community mobility strategies for older adults?
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle