MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206347573 · doi:10.1177/23337214211063102

Connection Through Calls: The Impact of a Seniors Center Without Walls on Older Adults’ Social Isolation and Loneliness

2021· article· en· W4206347573 on OpenAlexafffundabout

Bibliographic record

VenueGerontology and Geriatric Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesOntario Stroke Network
FundersEmployment and Social Development Canada
KeywordsLonelinessSocial connectednessPsychosocialSocial isolationFeelingUCLA Loneliness ScaleQuality of life (healthcare)Intervention (counseling)Scale (ratio)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Edmonton Seniors Centre Without Walls program provides free health, psychosocial, and educational telephone programming for older adults who experience multiple barriers to traditional in-person programming. The aim of this program evaluation was to assess outcomes of participation using validated scales of loneliness and psychosocial and health quality of life. Telephone interviews were conducted pre ( n = 160) and post ( n = 99) with participants. Given the variation in average attendance, results were assessed by level of participation: Low, Moderate, and High Users. There was statistically significant improvement in all participants’ attitudes towards their self-realization and towards energy levels, and EQ-5D-5L anxiety/depression scale after participation, along with a significant reduction in feelings of social isolation. The highest rates of improvement were seen within High Users. These findings suggest that telephone-based programs could be a useful intervention to improve the wellbeing and socially connectedness of older adults.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.464
Threshold uncertainty score0.607

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGerontology and Geriatric MedicineSame topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207