MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899542286 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igy023.3099

FRENCH SPEAKING OLDER ADULTS AGING IN PLACE IN OFFICIAL LANGUAGE MINORITY COMMUNITIES

2018· article· en· W2899542286 on OpenAlexaffabout
Suzanne Dupuis‐Blanchard, Julie Caissie, Michael Corman

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsGovernment of Prince Edward IslandUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitizen journalismThematic analysisContext (archaeology)Focus groupFace (sociological concept)Health careSocial WelfareOfficial languageAging in placeGerontologyQualitative researchService (business)Political scienceSociologyGender studiesPsychologyMedicineGeographyBusinessSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

French speaking seniors living in official language minority communities in Canada face challenges accessing services in their language of choice. The province of Prince Edward Island (PEI) in Eastern Canada is developing a provincial strategy on aging where a qualitative participatory study was conducted to 1) better understand service utilization by French speaking seniors for aging in place, and 2) identify which services need improvements to provide services in both official languages (French and English). A total of 26 older adults and family members participated in four focus groups in rural communities on PEI. Thematic analysis identified the needs of French speaking seniors in the context of accessing services and care for aging in place as a struggle when in contact with the health care system. It is important to consider study results in the development and revision of social and health policy as well as the strategy on aging.

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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.818

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.372 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicHealthcare Systems and PracticesFrench-language works237,207