MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077956542 · doi:10.1177/0886260509340546

Aging and Risk: Physical and Sexual Abuse of Elders in Canada

2009· review· en· W2077956542 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

VenueJournal of Interpersonal Violence · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElder Abuse and Neglect
Canadian institutionsNipissing University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElder abuseSexual abusePhysical abuseContext (archaeology)Poison controlSuicide preventionPsychologyGerontologyAnxietyHuman factors and ergonomicsDomestic violencePsychiatryMedicineClinical psychologyMedical emergencyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we review the literature on physical and sexual elder abuse within the context of risk theory and feminist sociology. Employing data from the 1999 General Social Survey, we also examine several variables potentially associated with the risk for physical or sexual abuse of elders. Women, Aboriginal Canadians, and elders who are divorced, living in urban areas with low income have a higher risk of physical or sexual abuse. This supports risk and anxiety as factors. Further testing of elder abuse using this theoretical framework is required.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.305 · 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