MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964916275 · doi:10.1155/2012/450630

Learning from “Knocks in Life”: Food Insecurity among Low-Income Lone Senior Women

2012· article· en· W1964916275 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aging Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityMount Saint Vincent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQualitative researchFood securityPerceptionNova scotiaPopulationGerontologyWork (physics)MedicineEconomic growthSociologyPsychologyEnvironmental healthGeographyEconomicsSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Building on earlier quantitative work where we showed that lone senior households reliant on public pensions in Nova Scotia (NS), Canada lacked the necessary funds for a basic nutritious diet, here we present findings from a qualitative study involving in-depth interviews with eight low-income lone senior women living in an urban area of NS. Using a phenomenological inquiry approach, in-depth interviews were used to explore lone senior women's experiences accessing food with limited financial resources. Drawing upon Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory, we explored their perceived ability to access a nutritionally adequate and personally acceptable diet, and the barriers and enablers to do so; as well in light of our previous quantitative research, we explored their perceptions related to adequacy of income, essential expenses, and their strategies to manage personal finances. Seven key themes emerged: world view, income adequacy, transportation, health/health problems, community program use, availability of family and friends, and personal food management strategies. World view exerted the largest influence on seniors' personal perception of food security status. The implications of the findings and policy recommendations to reduce the nutritional health inequities among this vulnerable subset of the senior population are considered.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.242
GPT teacher head0.502
Teacher spread0.260 · 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