Community participation in activities and places among older adults with and without dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Availability of community-based destinations and amenities can facilitate healthy aging by supporting older adults' functional abilities and enabling their participation in society, especially for those experiencing declining cognitive abilities. This study used a survey tool called participation in ACTivities and places OUTside the Home for older adults, specifically designed to examine the out-of-home participation of older adults living with or without dementia, to collect data on specific places and activities that individuals participate in over time. Thirty cognitively intact participants and 29 participants living with dementia were recruited. The past/present net participation figures indicate that all destinations are likely to be abandoned by persons with dementia over time. The findings indicate that both groups of participants were most likely to abandon recreation and physical activity places, although a higher number of persons with dementia reported that they would likely abandon these places in the future than the cognitively intact participants. Participants with dementia indicated multiple en route and at destination challenges, as well as their coping strategies. This study adds to our understanding of the out-of-home places visited by persons living with and without dementia and the patterns of changes in those visits over time. The findings are useful for health and social care professionals, including occupational therapists, social workers, as well as family caregivers, in recognizing the relative importance of certain out-of-home places and activities over others and the challenges faced by persons with dementia in getting to those places. This knowledge can inform programme and service providers to develop targeted interventions to support continued engagement by older adults with dementia and cognitively intact 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".