MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Competence and risk in older adults: A social work perspective

2009· article· en· W2730111921 on OpenAlexaff
Mary Farrelly

Bibliographic record

VenueAotearoa New Zealand Social Work · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealthcare innovation and challenges
Canadian institutionsCentre for Community Based Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutonomyDignitySocial workCompetence (human resources)DutyPerspective (graphical)PsychologySocial psychologyOlder peopleGerontologySociologyPublic relationsMedicinePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In more than 15 years of working with older people, in community settings and in health, one of the more common triggers for social work involvement centred around issues of competency – the capacity of the older person to continue to exercise autonomy and self determination in any or all facets of his/her life. Social workers operate within defined ethical guidelines, one of which is to recognise and uphold the dignity of the individual and the individual’s right to autonomy. However, often there is tension between the twin values of upholding this right to autonomy and the duty of care when working with older people where there is a question of impaired cognition and decision-making capacity. This article explores that tension in terms of the social work response.

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 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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.769
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAotearoa New Zealand Social WorkSame topicHealthcare innovation and challengesFrench-language works237,207