MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2809248276 · doi:10.5539/ass.v14n7p1

The Policy Development of Social Welfare for Elderly Health Care in the Community: A Case Study of Phitsanulok Municipality, Thailand

2018· article· en· W2809248276 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thanach Kanokthet

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCommission on Higher Education
KeywordsWelfareSocial WelfareHealth careSocial policyElderly peopleGerontologySample (material)PsychologyMedicineEnvironmental healthEconomic growthPolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research was aimed at developing a social welfare policy on elderly health care in the community through a case study of Phitsanulok Municipality. The objectives of the study were 1) to develop elements and indicators of social welfare for elderly health care, 2) to develop a model for developing social welfare for elderly health care and 3) to investigate the policy development of social welfare for elderly health care. Mixed Method was utilized using survey component analysis research method, content analysis, component confirmation, deep interview and group discussion. The sample groups in this research are 759 elders and 60 organization managers who are involved in social welfare policy for long term elderly health care. Results showed 1) social welfare for elderly health care is included in the existing policy in the area and is operational, but it lacks policy contents which are consistent with the needs of the elderly. Additionally, 2) 34 indicators and five elements were identified as components and parameters of social welfare for the elderly in Phitsanulok. Analysis showed the three elements and six indicators are important and two of the six relate to public health. Analysis by Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy found KMO value equal to 0.912 and structural reliability α= 0.83-0.97. Lastly, 3) the evaluation results revealed that social welfare policy for elderly health care in Phitsanulok is suitable at a high level.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.415 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social Science→Same topicGlobal Health Workforce Issues→French-language works237,207→