MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4299499897 · doi:10.51952/9781447335924.ch003

Reinventing the nursing home: metaphors that design care

2018· book-chapter· en· W4299499897 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Susan Braedley

Bibliographic record

VenuePolicy Press eBooks · 2018
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture, Design, and Social History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drawing on findings from team nursing home ethnographies in Canada, the UK, Sweden and the US, this chapter argues that new designs for nursing home care draw from a social imagination limited by contemporary ideals of individualism, practices of consumerism and structures of inequality. As newly built or renovated nursing homes are designed to support better care for frail older adults, a contradictory mix of policy aims has emerged, including improvements to economic efficiency and sustainability, better standards of care and wellbeing for residents, and efforts to create appealing, hospitable environments. The research brings critical attention to walls, gardens and furnishings, arguing that they not only shape the everyday life of frail old age but also reveal tensions between what residents and those who provide care require, what is designed for them and what is expected of them.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.131 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolicy Press eBooksSame topicArchitecture, Design, and Social HistoryFrench-language works237,207