MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036452451 · doi:10.1177/01939450022044601

Severe Visual Impairment in Older Women

2000· article· en· W2036452451 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueWestern Journal of Nursing Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisual impairmentPsychologyMedicineGerontologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this qualitative, phenomenological study was to uncover the meaning of severe visual impairment to older women diagnosed with macular degeneration, a leading cause of blindness in older adults. The research question for the study was, What is the lived experience of severe visual impairment in older women diagnosed with macular degeneration? Participants were eight women, aged 63 to 85 years, who had been diagnosed with macular degeneration and who had severe visual deficits. Data were gathered through audiotaped interviews. Interview recordings were transcribed and later analyzed using a modified Giorgi methodology. The meaning of severe visual impairment emerged as "persisting toward unfolding ways of being in the world sparked by personal discoveries amidst enveloping losses while embracing a realistic awareness with steadfast positivism." Findings from this study were congruent with the theory of Human Becoming. Study findings highlight factors that may place older women with severe visual deficits at risk for lower levels of well-being.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient 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 score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.403 · 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