The Acceptability of Home Monitoring Technology Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults and Baby Boomers
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
This pilot study investigated the willingness of two generational cohorts (current baby boomers and older adults) to accept home monitoring technology. Thirty individuals (15 baby boomers and 15 older adults) of both genders and living in the community participated in structured, mixed methods interviews. The participants' opinions and views on various technologies (e.g., personal emergency response systems, fall detection systems) and sensor types (e.g., switches, motion sensors, computer vision) were determined, including locations within the home where they would be willing to install and use such technologies. Overall, it was found that these technologies would be acceptable if they allowed the participants to remain in their own homes and to age in place. Furthermore, a between-group analysis indicated that there were not many statistically significant differences between the opinions of the two cohorts with respect to preferences about types and locations of these technologies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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