Attendant’s experience with the personalized citizen assistance for social participation (APIC)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To promote healthy aging, the social participation needs of older adults must be better met. Previous studies have shown the benefits of the Personalized citizen assistance for social participation (APIC), but few explored its influence on attendants. This study explored the assistance experience of attendants in providing the APIC to older adults with disabilities. METHODS: A qualitative design inspired by a phenomenological approach was used with six female attendants who participated in individual interviews. RESULTS: The APIC attendants felt useful, developed meaningful relationships with their older adults, and improved their self-knowledge. Attendants had the opportunity to reflect on their lives and self-aging. They contributed to older adults' functional independence, motivation, and participation in social activities. Attendants encountered challenges related to withdrawn behavior in older adults, such as refusing to participate in activities. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the identified benefits of the APIC for attendants, further studies should explore personalized assistance to preserve older adults' health.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".