MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3137450459 · doi:10.1017/s0714980821000040

Online Social Networking and Mental Health among Older Adults: A Scoping Review

2021· review· en· W3137450459 on OpenAlex
Erica Chen, Devin Wood, Renate Ysseldyk

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLonelinessMental healthSocial isolationSocial connectednessPsychological interventionSocial supportGerontologyPsychologyDepression (economics)Life satisfactionPsychiatryMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the number of older adults is expected to increase exponentially within the next few decades, loneliness, social isolation, and depression among seniors are growing public health concerns. Although formal treatment options, such as therapy and medication, can be helpful for depression, they can also be expensive and sometimes ineffective. It is therefore important to consider other potential treatment options and social interventions. Alternative methods for addressing mental health issues are especially important for older adults, as they may encounter barriers associated with aging such as limited mobility and decreased social networks. In these circumstances, online social networking may offer a potential "social cure" to alleviate loneliness, social isolation, and depression. The purpose of this scoping review was to gather and summarize the current literature on associations between online social networking and mental health outcomes (e.g., depression, life satisfaction, loneliness) among older adults. An initial search of 3,699 articles resulted in 52 articles that met criteria for inclusion. Five common themes were identified: (1) enhanced communication with family and friends, (2) greater independence and self-efficacy, (3) creation of online communities, (4) positive associations with well-being and life satisfaction, and (5) decreased depressive symptoms. Implications for older adults' mental health, social connectedness, programs and policies are discussed.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.286 · 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