The meaning of the experience of anticipating falling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Falling in later life continues to be a critical issue in gerontology research, health professional practice and ageing health policy. However, much research in the area of fall risk and fall prevention neglects the meaning of the experiences of older people themselves. This humanistic interpretive phenomenological study explored the meaning of the experience of anticipating falling from the perspective of older people in order to foster a more person-focused approach to fall risk assessment and fall prevention. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine participants over the age of 65 living independently in the community. Follow-up interviews with two key informants were completed to inform the emerging interpretations. For older participants residing in the community, the experience of anticipating falling meant confronting their embodied lived-identity in the context of ageing. Experiential learning shaped how participants understood the meaning of falling, which constituted tacit, pathic knowledge of vulnerability and anxiety with respect to falling. Findings emphasise the importance of critically reflecting on the social experience of anticipating falling to develop effective and relevant fall prevention interventions, programmes and policies. A lifeworld-led approach to fall risk assessment and fall prevention resonates with these findings, and may encourage health-care providers to adopt a sustained focus on embodied lived-identity and quality of life when engaging older people in fall prevention activities.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".