MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3114121794 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igaa057.1789

Steering an Age-Friendly University (AFU) Initiative: Insights from Directors of Aging Centers

2020· article· en· W3114121794 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joann M. Montepare, Kimberly Farah

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of New England
KeywordsGeneral partnershipMandateHigher educationInstitutionProgram directorExecutive directorTimelinePolitical scienceMedical educationPublic relationsGerontologySociologyManagementMedicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The pioneering Age-Friendly University (AFU) initiative, endorsed in 2016 by GSA’s Academy for Gerontology in Higher Education (AGHE), calls for institutions of higher education to respond to shifting demographics and the needs of our aging populations through more age-friendly programs, practices, and partnerships. Over 65 institutions have joined the AFU network and adopted the 10 AFU guiding principles. This symposium will feature leaders at AFU campuses representing centers on aging and gerontology programs who will discuss why their institution joined the initiative, their age-friendly campus vision, and their recommendations for mounting an AFU initiative. AFU Director Charness (Florida State University) will describe launching an AFU initiative from the perspective of a state university, with a focus on critical discussion points, the concerns of upper administration, and the timeline for completion of the process. AFU Director Porter (University of Manitoba) will discuss how the Centre on Aging has been using its mandate as a research centre to advance the age-friendly movement through research, knowledge mobilization, training, and partnership initiatives. AFU Director Schumacher (University of Maryland Baltimore County) will talk about how the AFU framework has served as a platform for new and constructive synergies among gerontology programs, centers on aging, health systems, and higher education. AFU Director Gugliucci (University of New England) will discuss strategies for leading health professions education programs within an AFU framework, with special attention to AGHE resources available to support these efforts. Directors of Aging Centers Interest Group Sponsored Symposium.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.107
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.069
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.567

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1070.069
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0240.010
Scholarly communication0.0220.009
Open science0.0050.022
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicAging and Gerontology ResearchFrench-language works237,207