“PEOPLE DON'T LIVE IN A VACUUM”: CO-DEVELOPING A BRAIN HEALTH PILOT PROGRAM IN THE COMMUNITY THROUGH CITIZEN SCIENCE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Psychosocial Model of Everyday Cognitive Resilience identifies social identity as an important determinant of older adults’ wellbeing as they experience cognitive decline in community settings. We engaged community-dwelling older adults to assess the model and co-develop programs that address existing gaps through twelve focus groups. N=55 older adults were recruited from various community organizations. Two 1-hour sessions discussed (1) variables that were important to older adults, namely neighbourhood friendship and social experiences, and (2) how these mediated the effects of self-expression, time outdoors, and communal provisions on mental wellbeing. Many participants highlighted the importance of strong friendship for deeper needs such as grief support, whereas others pointed out the relevance of meaningful activities or volunteering opportunities for a sense of purpose. Overall, a speed-friending program with an emphasis on listening was desirable for connecting and contributing socioemotionally to develop “happy medium” friendships, while piloting evidence-based interventions for brain health.
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 | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".