MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080773166 · doi:10.1300/j084v16n02_01

A Gendered Analysis of the Abuse of Older Adults: Evidence from Professionals

2004· article· en· W2080773166 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

VenueJournal of Elder Abuse & Neglect · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElder Abuse and Neglect
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElder abuseExploratory researchPsychologySuicide preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsQualitative researchFocus groupPhysical abusePoison controlChild abuseClinical psychologyGerontologyMedicineMedical emergencySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Researchers are beginning to examine issues of age, gender, and abuse, but empirical data is lacking. The purpose of this exploratory study was to identify contextual variables, with a particular focus on gender, that may be related to the abuse of older adults. Abuse cases, as described by 121 professionals who worked with seniors, were analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. Three themes emerged through analysis of the qualitative data that provided insight into factors contributing to the abuse of older adults: characteristics of the abused senior, characteristics of the abuser, and the living environment. Results showed linkages between abuse of older adults, gender, and family.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.578

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.322
Teacher spread0.298 · 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