LGBTQ2+ aging in Canada: Building the evidence and informing action
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Within Canada, there has been increased Federal recognition and support for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, Two-Spirit (LGBTQ2+) individuals and communities. The recognition of previous systemic discrimination helps to illustrate the unique social and historical contexts those current older adults faced as they aged as members of LGBTQ2+ communities. Addressing the diverse and unique needs of LGBTQ2+ older adults is crucial to ensuring safety and well-being within formal and informal care settings yet, due to a lack of research evidence, this remains a challenge. In order to advance research and action on LGBTQ2+ aging in Canada, stakeholders were convened at a research-policy forum to establish a community of interest and catalyze activities to support a diverse aging population. Immediate concerns that were raised included: social isolation, healthcare, education and training needs for providers, stigma and discrimination, and housing. Other knowledge gaps included dementia care and the effects of cognitive impairment on sexual and gender identity, lived realities of older LGBTQ2+ ethnic minorities, and the experiences of older Two-Spirit Canadians. Attendees highlighted the importance of showcasing success stories of aging among LGBTQ2+ communities in addition to describing experienced challenges. Considering that members of LGBTQ2+ communities who experienced systemic discrimination and in or approaching old age, action on these fronts is urgently needed.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".