Social isolation in older adults who are frequent users of primary care services.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe older adults who are frequent users of primary care services and to explore associations between the number of primary care visits per year and multiple dimensions that define social isolation. DESIGN: Mailed, cross-sectional survey. SETTING: An urban academic primary care practice in Kingston, Ont. PARTICIPANTS: Forty patients aged 70 years and older who attended 12 or more appointments in the previous year with residents, physicians, nurses, nurse practitioners, or registered practical nurses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Social isolation (size of close social network, loneliness, satisfaction with social participation, frequency of social participation), past and future need for health services related to social issues, and health and functional variables. RESULTS: The participants reported relatively low levels of loneliness, with a mean (SD) score of 4.1 (1.3) out of 9. Overall, 18.9% of participants reported having a small close social network, 45.9% of participants wanted to do more social activities, and 57.5% of participants were isolated according to at least 1 indicator. Some participants (23.1%) had received primary care services related to social issues, and most participants (54.5%) wanted these services in the future, including receiving information about other health services or community resources, or having discussions about loneliness, relationships, or social activities. Number of primary care visits was not associated with any of the 4 indicators of social isolation. CONCLUSION: Social isolation in older, frequent users of primary care services might be more common than previously thought, particularly the aspect of dissatisfaction with social participation. Expanded primary care services and referrals to other services might help to address this population's desires for services related to social issues. Future research could examine the social needs of older primary care attenders and the feasibility of providing related interventions in primary care settings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".