MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3153752135 · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.589244

COVID-19 and Quarantine, a Catalyst for Ageism

2021· article· en· W3153752135 on OpenAlexaff
Nathalie Barth, Jessica Guyot, Sarah Fraser, Martine Lagacé, Stéphane Adam, Pauline Gouttefarde, Luc Goethals, Lauren Bechard, Bienvenu Bongué, Hervé Fundenberger, Thomas Célarier

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Public Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Quarantine2019-20 coronavirus outbreakGerontologySevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Young adultSolidarityMedicineOlder peoplePsychologyPolitical scienceVirologyDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In February 2021, France had more than 76,000 deaths due to COVID-19 and older adults were heavily affected. Most measures taken to reduce the impact of COVID-19 (quarantine, visit ban in nursing home, etc.) significantly influenced the lives of older adults. Yet they were rarely consulted about their implementation. Exclusion of and discrimination against older adults has been accentuated during the COVID-19 pandemic. While many articles discussing COVID-19 also mention ageism, few actually incorporate the perspectives and opinions of older adults. Our research aims to assess the ageism experienced by older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted interviews with older adults (63-92 years, mean age = 76 years) in an urban area of France. Participants reported experiencing more ageism during the COVID-19 pandemic, including hostile and benevolent ageism from older adults' families. Despite reports of experiencing ageist attitudes and behaviors from others, however, older adults also identified positive signs of intergenerational solidarity during this COVID-19 crisis.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations39
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Public HealthSame topicAging and Gerontology ResearchFrench-language works237,207