Developing a model of resilience in older adulthood: a qualitative meta-synthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The study of resilience in an older adult population is expanding rapidly. However, most theoretical models of resilience have been developed with children or young to middle-aged adults. The objective of the present study was to review systematically the qualitative literature examining resilience in older adults, and to develop a comprehensive model of resilience in older adulthood. A qualitative meta-synthesis was conducted to review the qualitative literature examining resilience from older adults’ perspectives. An exhaustive search of the literature revealed 1,752 articles. From these articles, 34 studies meeting inclusion criteria were selected for analysis. Across the 34 studies analysed, eight themes were revealed as important for achieving resilience later in life: perseverance and determination, self-efficacy and independence, purpose and meaning, positive perspective, social support, faith and prayer, previous experience and being proactive. These themes can be organised into a four-factor model: (a) Intrapersonal Protective Factors; (b) Interpersonal Protective Factors; (c) Spiritual Protective Factors; and (d) Experiential Protective Factors. This study presents a new model of resilience in older adulthood that is grounded in qualitative literature and is relevant and appropriate for an older adult population. This research may be useful for clinicians, support workers and researchers working with older individuals through improving our understanding of what contributes to resilience later in life.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".