MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144567711 · doi:10.1017/s0714980800000659

Older Women's Community Mobility: A Qualitative Exploration

2002· article· en· W2144567711 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marcia Finlayson, Joseph M. Kaufert

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecreationTRIPS architectureQualitative researchEveningIndependence (probability theory)GerontologyPerspective (graphical)PerceptionActivities of daily livingPsychologyMedicineSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Many of the limitations experienced by community-dwelling older women are related to mobility within their communities. This qualitative study explored community mobility from the perspective of older, community-dwelling women in Winnipeg, Manitoba. Semi-structured interviews were completed with 23 older women (mean age 75.9 years) identified through an existing database. In addition to travels to conduct instrumental activities of daily living and participate in social and recreational activities, the women in the study described trips to fulfil social obligations (e.g., attending funerals, visiting sick friends) and emphasized the importance of these trips. The women's travels through the city were influenced by their perception of risk and the strategies they employed to minimize or avoid risk during the day, in the evening, and during bad weather. Autonomous community mobility provided the women with a sense of independence and control. The findings have potential implications for health care providers and community programmers who work to maintain older women in the community.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0130.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissementSame topicOlder Adults Driving StudiesFrench-language works237,207