MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067884505 · doi:10.1353/cja.2006.0013

Younger-Old and Older-Old Adults' Recall of Medication Instructions

2005· article· en· W2067884505 on OpenAlexaff
Leslie McDonald-Miszczak, Shevaun D. Neupert, Gloria Gutman

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecallPsychologyYoung adultGerontologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicineCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The present study was conducted to expand research showing that older adults' expectations that they will recall particular medication instructions do not coincide with their actual ability to do so. Seventy-one younger-old adults (M = 68.10 years, range = 57–74) and 62 older-old adults (M = 80.31 years, range = 75–89) made judgements about the likelihood of their recalling medication instructions and about their confidence in their recall. The results indicate that older-old adults recall fewer instructions than do younger-old adults and that both groups overestimate their ability to recall the instructions. This research suggests that problems remembering to take medication may be due, in part, to older adults' overestimating the ease with which they will remember medication instructions.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations16
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissementSame topicPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207