Using the arts for awareness, communication and knowledge translation in older adulthood: a scoping review
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The arts are powerful methods of enhancing social engagement and well-being in older adulthood. Literature on arts utility in translating knowledge about ageing and related processes is emerging but poorly understood. We conducted a scoping review to map research on how the arts are used for awareness, communication, and knowledge translation in older adulthood. METHODS: We consulted a research librarian, comprehensively searched four interdisciplinary databases, systematically screened 1321 articles and extracted data from 11 included articles. RESULTS: Articles predominantly originated from the Health Sciences, were informed by qualitative data, and were developed linearly, from problem identification to art development. Performance theatre was the most commonly employed narrative approach. CONCLUSIONS: Approaches to arts development in this context do not maximize collaboration and participant engagement, thereby reducing potential impacts of arts for older persons. We propose a cyclical and collaborative alternative to developing arts strategies for combined communicative and engagement purposes.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it