MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Middle Range Theory for Generative Quality of Life for the Elderly

2006· review· en· W1974393481 on OpenAlexaff
M. Elizabeth Register, JoAnne Herman

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Nursing Science · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsCollege & Association of Registered Nurses of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Generative grammarQuality of life (healthcare)Context (archaeology)PsychologyQuality (philosophy)Face (sociological concept)GerontologyComputer scienceMedicineEpistemologySociologyArtificial intelligencePsychotherapistSocial scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decades of quality of life (QOL) research has failed to produce widely recognized QOL definitions or measurements. The inconsistency may be due to an ontological error in the perspective of researchers. Most researchers portray QOL as a given or inherent condition that declines in the face of challenges. We believe QOL is a cumulative process that results from a series of connections and disconnections that elders experience in their daily lives. The Register theory of Generative Quality of Life for the Elderly offers an alternative ontological perspective by placing elder QOL in a generative context.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.203
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations37
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Nursing ScienceSame topicAging and Gerontology ResearchFrench-language works237,207