MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Design and Development of Novel Cooking and Heating Products for Irish Older Adults: A Real Health Need

2011· article· en· W2270705672 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
P.J. White, Frank Devitt

Bibliographic record

VenueDesign Principles and Practices An International Journal—Annual Review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCrafts, Textile, and Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIrishGerontologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The world's population is ageing; researchers have an increasingly important role to play in innovating new products, appliances and services to allow for better everyday living conditions of this ageing demographic. Health, wellbeing and age in place needs are of particular importance in Ireland as research has revealed that as a nation we are living longer in ill health (McGill, 2009). The most fundamental domestic products to health, wellbeing and in the promotion of ageing in place are cooking and heating products, however little design research has been carried out in this area. To inquire into the context of usability in older adults, ethnographic research has been conducted within the homes of participant older adults to obtain a true insight into user needs in cooking and heating products. This involved a yearlong (Spring, Summer, Autumn and Winter) study with forty participants over the age of 70 years across Ireland and from various socio-economic groups. From this study prototypes will be created and user tested by older adults to determine appropriate design criteria for these products.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.260
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.122 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDesign Principles and Practices An International Journal—Annual ReviewSame topicCrafts, Textile, and DesignFrench-language works237,207