MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328941422 · doi:10.3928/00989134-20111004-02

Are Gerontological Nurses Apathetic About Apathy in Older Adults

2011· article· en· W2328941422 on OpenAlexaff
Annette Lane, Sandra P. Hirst

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gerontological Nursing · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApathyGerontological nursingPsychologyHealth professionalsRehabilitationHealth careNursingMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite its serious health consequences, apathy in older adults is often underrecognized by gerontological nurses and other health care professionals. Within this article, we discuss what apathy is and present a review of the literature and research. Two frameworks emerging from the literature search-one regarding rehabilitation and the other illness-are introduced as ways in which apathy may be conceptualized and addressed. Using these frameworks, implications for gerontological nurses are outlined.

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)0.076
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.076
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Gerontological NursingSame topicAging and Gerontology ResearchFrench-language works237,207