‘It makes your life worthwhile. It gives you a purpose in living’: mobility experiences among active older adults with low income
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The World Health Organization claims that mobility is vital to healthy ageing and is the best guarantee of older adults being able to cope and remain in their homes and communities. Mobility enables older adults to maintain their physical health, independence and participation in society. In general, mobility is examined objectively, from a quantitative perspective where mobility is measured as physical movement ( e.g. physical activity) and/or travel behaviour ( e.g. trips, modes and distances). The predominant focus on the functional aspects of mobility tends to overlook the subjective ( e.g. perceptions, attitudes and motivations) and temporal dimensions of older adults’ mobility experiences. Using a constructivist grounded theory methodology, we conducted 24 in-depth interviews with six highly active community-dwelling older adults with low income, aged 65 or over, over a period of four years. Our analysis identified the following themes: maintaining a sense of self, being resourceful, openness to engagement, engaging in superficial contact, experiencing social capital, accessing transportation, leaving the immediate neighbourhood and facing affordability. Findings illustrate that intrapersonal factors, in addition to environmental (built, social and cultural) and temporal-level factors, play a crucial role in mobility. In the future, this gained knowledge can be incorporated into approaches to study the multiple interrelated factors and their interrelations that influence older adults’ mobility.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".