Moving Beyond ‘Aging In Place’ to Understand Migration and Aging: Place Making and the Centrality Of Occupation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
'Aging in place' has become a key conceptual framework for understanding and addressing place within the aging process. However, aging in place has been critiqued for not sufficiently providing tools to understand relations or transactions between aging and place, and for not matching the diversity of contemporary society in which people are moving between and across nations more than ever before. In this article, the authors draw from concepts of place and migration that are becoming increasingly visible in occupational science. The concept of 'aging in place' is critically examined as an example of an ideal where the understanding of place is insufficiently dynamic in a context of migration. The authors suggest that the concept of place making can instead be a useful tool to understand how occupation can be drawn upon to negotiate relationships that connect people to different places around the world, how the negotiated relations are embedded within the occupations that fill daily lives, and how this process is contextualized and enacted in relation to resources and capabilities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it