Participation Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Participation in life situations is a critical aspect of health recognized by the World Health Organization. Guidelines to prevent spreading of COVID-19 place older adults at risk of worsening participation. The purpose of this study was to identify the factors associated with participation during the COVID-19 pandemic among community-dwelling older adults living in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. METHODS: Participants were recruited from identified census dissemination areas in Hamilton. Participants completed surveys either by phone or online during the months of May to August 2020. Measures were organized into factors related to body functions and structures, activities, participation, as well as personal and environmental contextual factors using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) framework. Multivariable regression analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with participation as measured by the Late-Life Disability Instrument's (LLDI) frequency and limitations scales. RESULTS: A total of 272 older adults completed the survey (78 [7.3] years; 70% female). Use of a walking aid, driving status, perceived mental health status, nutrition risk, and physical function explained 48.2% of the variance observed in the LLDI-frequency scale scores. Use of a walking aid, driving status, perceived mental health status, receiving health assistance, and physical function explained 38.5% of the variance observed in the LLDI-limitation scale scores. CONCLUSION: Results highlighted factors across multiple ICF domains that are associated with participation restriction among a sample of community-dwelling older adults during the pandemic. Participation during the pandemic was greatest in those that were able to walk without needing to use a walking aid, being a licensed and current driver, perceiving good to excellent mental health, and having greater physical function. IMPACT: Our findings contribute to the literature on older adult participation during lockdowns, restrictions, pandemics, and/or other similar circumstances.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".