WHAT AND HOW DID IT WORK? A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE INTERVENTION STUDIES OF CHANGING PERCEPTION TOWARD OLDER ADULTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Social workers are one of the major professionals serving for older adults. However, social work students often rank gerontology at the bottom of their future professional practice. Studies show that students have negative attitudes about, and perceptions of older adults and aging. Such stereotypes result in social work students considering practice areas other than gerontological social work. The objective of this study is to conduct a systematic review and identify any types of the intervention studies of changing perception and attitudes toward older adults and aging among social work students. This systematic review identified empirical research studies written in English that were published in a peer-reviewed journal before November 2021. Systematic search was carried out within four electronic databases (AgeLine, Education Research Complete, Social Work Abstracts, SocINDEX with full text) with the key words such as “social work student” and “aging or ageing or elderly or older adults or seniors or geriatrics or gerontology”. A total of 470 abstracts were identified, and after careful review of 143 full articles yielded from the databases, 43 journal articles were included in this study. Analysis of the selected literature provides that major interventions have been tried include service learning, lecture, curriculum development, simulation, training program, and intergenerational program. This systematic review highlights the importance of the experiential learning, partnership development with community, and interprofessional collaboration to provide the best model of practice for changing perception toward aging and older adults among social work students.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".