MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2735322646 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igx004.4805

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC INEQUALITIES: THE MARGINALISATION OF OLDER PEOPLE

2017· article· en· W2735322646 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Charles Waldegrave, Chris Cunningham

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionInequalityNeighbourhood (mathematics)Social WelfareWelfareSocial inequalitySocial determinants of healthPsychologyEconomic growthPolitical scienceHealth careEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This symposium will explore differing dimensions of social and economic inequalities and their impacts on the health and wellbeing of older citizens across differing countries and contexts. As the evidence concerning the impact of social relationships on morbidity and early death has grown in recent years, the challenge for researchers has been to understand its dimensions and the pathways that lead to positive rather than negative outcomes. Such research can be expected to have profound implications for positive health status and substantially reduced health and welfare budgets. The four presentations by researchers from Canada, New Zealand, Ireland, England and Poland will provide research data that addresses gender dimensions, urban and rural differences, multi-dimensional measurement constructs, social relationships, health, wealth, neighbourhood characteristics, area deprivation, discrimination and abuse to identify obvious and hidden aspects of the ways in which older people are often marginalised in their communities. These multiple domains of investigation will produce findings that can inform better quality service provision for older people and enable smart evidence based policy interventions to be developed. After attending this symposium, participants will have an informed understanding of the many forms of social and economic marginalisation and their negative impact on health and longevity. Additionally, participants will appreciate the multi-dimensional aspects of social and economic inequalities and ways to measure them. They will also be informed of risk and mitigating factors that will enhance the provision of services and evidence based policies that increase social inclusion for older citizens and reduce marginalisation.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0010.013
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in Aging→Same topicHealth disparities and outcomes→French-language works237,207→