MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762793634 · doi:10.1080/08946566.2017.1388756

Exploring gender and elder abuse from the perspective of professionals

2017· article· en· W2762793634 on OpenAlex

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

VenueJournal of Elder Abuse & Neglect · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElder Abuse and Neglect
Canadian institutionsGovernment of New BrunswickUniversity of New BrunswickUniversity of Prince Edward IslandUniversité de MonctonDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElder abusePerspective (graphical)Human factors and ergonomicsSuicide preventionFocus groupMedicinePsychologyPoison controlMedical emergencySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We conducted an online survey of professionals working in two Canadian provinces to learn about their knowledge of elder abuse from a gender-based perspective. A total of 169 professionals (90% women) completed a survey in either French or English. Five topic areas emerged from the analysis: the influence of gender on the risk of abuse; types of abuse detected; knowledge gaps; capacity to respond to gender-based abuse; and awareness of resources. To gain further insight into these results, we conducted three focus groups with a total of 24 professionals. Professionals held relatively little recognition of, or knowledge about, gender related to elder abuse. Our results indicate the need to develop educational and awareness raising opportunities for professionals who work with abused older adults in both French and English to identify and respond to the unique needs of older women and men.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.963

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.225 · 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