MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224234741 · doi:10.3390/disabilities2020015

Housing, Transportation and Quality of Life among People with Mobility Limitations: A Critical Review of Relationships and Issues Related to Access to Home- and Community-Based Services

2022· review· en· W4224234741 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueDisabilities · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreToronto Rehabilitation InstituteSunnybrook Health Science CentreCentre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-NationaleUniversity of TorontoCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationUniversité LavalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéParalyzed Veterans of America
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Quality of life (healthcare)AccommodationBusinessConceptual frameworkTransport engineeringPsychologyMedicineEngineeringSociologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anecdotal reports suggest that adequate housing and transportation could be fundamental elements required to ensure quality of life (QOL) for people with mobility limitations. Certain home- and community-based services (HCBS) are also necessary to ensure that housing and transportation needs are met. Understanding QOL as it relates to housing and transportation is critical for people with mobility limitations but requires appropriate assessment of these constructs. The aims of this research were to explore the relationships between housing and transportation on QOL for people with mobility limitations, to describe the current conceptual measurement issues and to propose dimensions of access that could facilitate assessment of QOL as it relates to housing, transportation and HCBS. A critical review of the literature was conducted by experts in disability, QOL and access theory. While evidence indicated a potential influence of housing and transportation on QOL for people with mobility limitations, the relationships between these concepts were weak and inconclusive. Moreover, the measurement tools used lacked appropriateness to specifically measure these constructs. Approaching these measurement issues within an access theory may better position future research to address the housing, transportation and HSBS needs of people with mobility limitations. Future research may consider elements of availability, accessibility, accommodation, affordability, acceptability and awareness to ensure access for people with mobility limitations. A better understanding of QOL as it relates to housing, transportation and HCBS will improve the quality of research, which may in turn improve access of adequate services for people with mobility limitations.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.949

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.288
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.195 · 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