MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2474926707

Services for seniors in small-town Canada: the paradox of community.

2008· article· en· W2474926707 on OpenAlex
Mark W. Skinner, Mark W. Rosenberg, Sarah Lovell, James R. Dunn, John Everitt, Neil Hanlon, Thomas Rathwell

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Aging, and Tourism Studies
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArgument (complex analysis)Coping (psychology)Public relationsVoluntary sectorRural areaRural communityEconomic growthCommunity healthHealth careBusinessSociologyNursingPolitical scienceSocioeconomicsPsychologyMedicineEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a prevailing argument that what small towns lack in formal services they make up for in close ties among rural people and a shared understanding of the notion of community. Drawing on research undertaken in 9 small towns across Canada, the authors examine how the concept of community operates with respect to the provision ofin-home and community care for seniors. The analysis is based on interviews with 55 key informants from local governments, health and social care agencies, voluntary sector organizations, and community groups. The findings reveal the paradox of the conventional belief that rural communities can compensate for lack of services for seniors while failing to take into account the uncertain coping ability of the local informal sectors. The authors challenge rural health policy decision-makers, researchers, and providers to debunk assumptions about services for seniors in rural Canada.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score0.555

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.201 · 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