INFORMAL NETWORK SUPPORTERS MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN FACILITATING USE OF FORMAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR ELDER ABUSE VICTIMS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hidden nature of elder abuse remains a major challenge in the field. Few elder abuse victims ever seek or receive assistance from formal support services (e.g., adult protective services, law enforcement) designed to ameliorate the effects of abuse and prevent re-victimization. This study examined whether the presence of a third-party “concerned person” in a victim’s social support network plays a role in enabling formal support service utilization. A representative population-based survey administered to a random sample of adults (n = 800) in New York State identified 83 cases of elder abuse from the past year. Penalized likelihood logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between availability of a concerned person and victim use of formal support services. Elder abuse victims who had a concerned person in their personal network were significantly more likely to use formal elder abuse support services than victims without a concerned person. Additionally, elder abuse victims who lived with their perpetrator were significantly less likely to use formal support services. Third-party concerned persons in a victim’s social support network represent a critical population to target in prevention efforts designed to promote elder abuse victim help-seeking and participation in the formal support system.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".