MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

SOCIO-PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECTS "HAPPY OLD AGE" AND OPPORTUNITIES OF SOCIAL SERVICES IN ITS PROVISION

2015· article· en· W2465661422 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Diana Spulber, Вероника Гребенникова, Natalya I. Nikitina

Bibliographic record

VenueHistorical and social-educational ideas · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Socio-Economic Development Trends
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversità degli Studi di GenovaMinistry of Education and Science of the Russian FederationAGE-WELL
KeywordsCompetence (human resources)SociologyAgency (philosophy)PsychologyLivelihoodPublic relationsGerontologySocial psychologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceMedicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article the authors examine the anthropological, physiological, socio-psychological, medical background happy old age; analyze the data of a number of domestic and foreign experimental work to identify factors, conditions that ensure comfortable livelihoods of the elderly person. Special attention is paid to the role of the sociogerontological competence of managers of the sanatorium and resort sphere in the creation of socio-cultural gerontology centre environment to ensure a happy old age customers, as well as the traditions of the Kuban Cossacks in relation to older people. A separate section of the article is devoted to the development of the Institute of foster families for older people in the Krasnodar region. Significant place in the article devoted to the analysis of various areas of professional activity of specialists of social service agencies within the community to enhance the revitalization of the manifestation of older people in different types of cultural and educational activities. The article reveals the essence and content of the concept of "socio-gerontological competence of the specialist institution of social service of the population". The authors examine the nature and structural components of the socio-cultural environment gerontology centre (pension) sanatorium profile, which is a special kind of communicative space of the Board, determining its existence and prospects of development as a specialized Agency for the elderly.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistorical and social-educational ideasSame topicRegional Socio-Economic Development TrendsFrench-language works237,207