MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019924024 · doi:10.1177/1471301209103273

Living on the threshold: The spatial experience of living alone with dementia

2009· article· en· W2019924024 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

VenueDementia · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPlace Attachment and Urban Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaInterpretation (philosophy)Meaning (existential)Space (punctuation)PsychologySituatedQualitative researchTheme (computing)Older peopleLived experienceDialecticGerontologySociologyMedicinePsychotherapistEpistemologyDiseaseSocial scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this qualitative study was to understand the meaning of living alone for older people with dementia. Fourteen audio-taped open-ended interviews were conducted with eight such older women in Ontario, Canada. The data were analyzed using an adaptation of van Manen's method. Heidegger's philosophy informed interpretation of the findings through the theme living on the threshold. The study findings deepen understanding of `space' and `place' in the experience of living alone with dementia. Participants sought the middle-ground of dialectical tensions within the threshold space and shared insights about their spatial experience of: (a) being here, (b) being there, (c) being out, and (d) keeping out. These older women risked losing their threshold space when admitting to mistakes as their illness progressed. The authors conclude with examples of how this spatial interpretation may inform and improve communication with and care of older people in similar circumstances.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.782

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.265 · 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