Sexual Consent Capacity Assessment with Older Adults
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many healthcare providers have a limited knowledge of sexual and intimate expression in later life, often due to attitudinal and informational limitations. Further, the likelihood of an older adult experiencing cognitive decline increases in a long-term care (LTC) setting, complicating the ability of the providers to know if the older adult can make his or her own sexual decisions, or has sexual consent capacity. Thus, the team is left to question if and how to support intimacy and/or sexuality among residents with intimacy needs. Psychologists working with LTC need to be aware and knowledgeable about sexual consent capacity in older adulthood to be prepared to conduct evaluations and participate in planning care. Limited research is available to consult for best practices in sexual consent capacity assessment; however, models of assessment have been developed based on the best available evidence, clinical judgment, and practice. Existing models will be discussed and an integrated model will be illustrated via a case study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it