MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2402924063 · doi:10.5206/wurjhns.2015-16.8

Potential Implications of Mail Delivery Conversion on Older Adults’ Risk of Falls in The Winter

2016· article· en· W2402924063 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jovana Sibalija, Mallory L. Ciminsky, Katharine Fuchigami, Marie-Helene L.S. He, Yu-Yuan Chen, John R. Trevithick, Geoff Bickerton, Aleksandra Zecevic

Bibliographic record

VenueWestern Undergraduate Research Journal Health and Natural Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsCanada Auto WorkersWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFalling (accident)SnowMedicinePopulationFall preventionOccupational safety and healthInjury preventionGerontologyBusinessPoison controlEnvironmental healthGeographyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In December 2013, Canada Post announced they would be converting approximately five million households from door-to-door mail delivery to community mailboxes (CMB). The decision was made to address decreasing letter mail volume and operating losses experienced by the crown corporation. The CMBs will be phased in over the five years mainly in urban areas across the country. The decision to convert to CMBs makes Canada the only among the G8 countries to end home delivery of mail. As a result, no research exists on the implications of the change. Particular concern has been raised over how the conversion will affect older adults. One area that needs examination is the consequences of the CMBs delivery model on fall rates among older adults in the winter. Falls are common among seniors, with 20-30% community dwelling older adults falling each year. The risk of falling is increased in the winter when there is snow and ice on the ground. Injuries dues to falls consume a great deal of healthcare resources. The purpose of this scoping literature review was to determine: What are the implications for the elderly population of Canada Post’s decision to convert home delivery of mail to community mailbox delivery? Specifically, the review focused on how the conversion may impact fall rates among older adults in the winter.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.384 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWestern Undergraduate Research Journal Health and Natural SciencesSame topicOlder Adults Driving StudiesFrench-language works237,207