Older men's perceptions of the need for and access to male-focused community programmes such as Men's Sheds
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
Although participating in community social programming is associated with positive physical and mental health outcomes for older adults, older men participate less often than women. Men's Sheds is a community programme used primarily by older men that originated in Australia and is well established there. The goal of the current study was to explore men's perceptions of the need for Men's Sheds and issues concerning access to them in Canada, a country with a small but growing Men's Sheds movement. We conducted focus groups with 64 men aged 55 years and older, including Men's Sheds members and men from the community who were unfamiliar with this programme, and analysed the data using the framework analytic approach. The data revealed two primary themes concerning: (a) the need for male-focused community programmes, including the sub-themes reducing isolation, forming friendships and engaging in continued learning; and (b) access to programmes, including the sub-themes points of contact, sustaining attendance and barriers. Findings suggest that in order to reduce the likelihood of isolation and increase opportunities for social engagement, exposure to the concept of male-focused programming should begin before retirement age. In addition, such programmes should be mindful of how they are branded and marketed in order to create spaces that are welcoming to new and diverse members.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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