COMMUNITY-BASED SERVICES AND OLDER ADULTS: A COMBINATION IN MENTAL HEALTH PROMOTION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Mental health promotion among older adults has been considered an important goal by the World Health Organization (WHO, 2017). Mental health has been understood as not necessarily the absence of mental illness, but in fact, points on a continuum that although are not mutually exclusive, and it may intersect at times (Cowen, 1991; Keyes & Westerhof, 2012). With such complex health component, medical practices—although extremely critical in many cases—are often one factor of in the equation. Other practices, such as positive relationships among individuals and measures to tackle isolation are relevant and successful when planning practice for mental health promotion (Wister & McPherson 2014; Newall & Menec, 2019). A study done at a community-based seniors service in Vancouver – Canada shows that these spaces are considered a critical resource for visible minority older adults. Two focus groups were conducted at a community-based senior service with visible minority older adults between ages 55 to 80 years old. Results show that visible minority older adults strongly rely on this sector to maintain the connection with the society, and to the services provided in the wider community. Community-based seniors service provide opportunities for social inclusion and interactions, learning new things, and it has an inverse association with feeling isolated and lonely at home—a constant issue stated in the research. These findings indicate the critical role of this sector in ameliorating and promoting the mental health of visible minority older adults.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".