Feasibility of Increasing Social Participation for Older Adults with Disabilities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to adapt the personalized citizen assistance for social participation (APIC; French acronym for Accompagnement-citoyen personnalisé d’intégration communautaire) approach for older adults with disabilities and explore its feasibility. A qualitative clinical research design, including interviews, was used with 19 older adults with disabilities. They met with their nonprofessional attendant (citizen supervised by the research team) about 20 times and 16 of them completed the APIC. Personal facilitators and barriers to physical, intellectual, manual, artistic and social interaction experiences were related to health and sensory, motor or behavioral capabilities, including psychological and emotional availability. Results also highlighted environmental facilitators (e.g., paratransit, social support) and barriers (e.g. inaccessibility, weather, over-protective family). The APIC represents new opportunities for older adults to achieve community integration and enhance their social life and resources, while confirming the feasibility of addressing the global “aging well” priority.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 it