Describing the Function, Disability, and Health of Adults With Disabilities and Older Adults During the Early Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic Restrictions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coronavirus disease 2019 restrictions impacted Canadians' daily living, especially those at higher risk of compromised health conditions. This study aimed to describe the physical, psychological, and social well-being of adults with disabilities, and older adults from May to June 2020. An online survey was used to administer standardized measures of mobility, anxiety and depression, boredom, resilience, technology readiness, social support, social networks, and participation. Seventy-two participants were recruited, with a mean age (SD) of 61.2 (13.8). 69.4% of participants had a disability, and 51.4% were older adults. 27.8% and 16.7% of participants exceeded the anxiety and depression cut-off scores, respectively. Boredom and restriction in participation were experienced by 76.4% and 80.1% of participants, respectively. Participants' mean (SD) resilience and life space scores were 72.4 (14.0) and 51.9 (24.0), respectively. Individuals with disabilities have comparatively higher mean anxiety (5.5 to 3.3), depression (4.8 to 2.9), and boredom (92.2 to 72.3) scores than those without. Individuals with a disability had lower resilience (69.9 to 78.0) and felt more life space restrictions (45.4 to 67.6). Our findings revealed issues with anxiety, boredom, participation, and life space activity. This information may provide supporting evidence when creating policies to mitigate existent health and social inequities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".