MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046334184 · doi:10.21018/rjcpr.2020.2.298

Opportunities and Challenges of Digital Delivery of Sharing Dance Seniors for Social Inclusion

2020· article· en· W3046334184 on OpenAlexafffundabout
An Kosurko, Rachel Herron, Mark W. Skinner, Rachel J. Bar, Pia Kontos, Alisa Grigorovich, Verena Menec

Bibliographic record

VenueRomanian Journal of Communication and Public Relations · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of TorontoToronto Metropolitan UniversityBrandon UniversityTrent University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchTrent UniversityCanada Research ChairsAlzheimer Society
KeywordsFacilitatorInclusion (mineral)DancePsychologyPublic relationsSociologyMedical educationMedicineSocial psychologyPolitical scienceVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Older people, especially those living with dementia, experience significant barriers to meaningful participation in their communities. Focusing on the expansion of an arts-based program to address social inclusion for older people via information communication technology (ICT), this paper identifies the challenges and opportunities of the digital delivery of the Baycrest NBS Sharing Dance Seniors program, a weekly dance class professionally instructed via online-streamed video and facilitated in-person in community and institutional care settings. Findings are drawn from older people and career experiences in community-based, multi-method pilot studies in the Peterborough Region, Ontario, and the Westman Region, Manitoba (2017-19) Canada. Through observations, diaries, focus groups, and interviews featuring the experiences of program instructors, participants, carers, administrators, facilitators, and volunteers, the challenges and opportunities presented by the digital delivery of the Sharing Dance program are analyzed as they relate to understanding social connectivity and relational and multi-dimensional influences on social inclusion. Findings point to the key role of facilitators and in-person support, with implications for the development of social resources and facilitator training in community and institutional settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.673
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.125
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRomanian Journal of Communication and Public RelationsSame topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207