Monitoring and Evaluation of Dementia-Friendly Neighborhoods Using a Walkshed Approach: Protocol for a Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The number of people in society living with dementia is growing. In Canada, most people who live with dementia live at home, often in a neighborhood setting. Neighborhood environments can be a source of independence, social engagement, and well-being. They can also contain barriers that limit physical activity, social engagement, and well-being. A dementia-friendly neighborhood includes assets that support persons living with dementia and their caregivers in multiple life domains, including those that support walking within the neighborhood environment. OBJECTIVE: The objectives for this scoping review are twofold. First, focusing on walkshed analysis, we aim to extend scholarly understandings of methodological practices used in the monitoring and evaluation of dementia-friendly neighborhoods. Second, we aim to provide clear and practical guidance for those working in planning, design, and public health fields to assess the neighborhood context in support of evidence-based action to improve the lives of persons living with dementia. METHODS: The study design follows Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review framework and PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols) guidelines. We will conduct a search of peer-reviewed studies in 6 electronic databases to identify the use of Geographic Information System analysis to measure the walkshed of persons living with dementia in a community setting. As age is a primary risk factor associated with dementia, we will also include studies that focus more broadly on community-dwelling older adults aged 65 years and older. Data will be extracted, analyzed, and represented according to 3 domains. This includes study details, walkshed analysis methods, and criteria and indicators used to measure dementia-friendly neighborhoods. RESULTS: The results of the study and the submission of a manuscript for peer review are expected in June 2024. The results of the review are expected to contribute to an understanding of methods for monitoring and evaluating dementia-friendly neighborhoods. Expected findings will include a detailed breakdown of current parameters and routines used to conduct walkshed analysis. Findings will also convey criteria that can be operationalized in a Geographic Information System as indicators to assess barriers and facilitators to walking in a neighborhood setting. CONCLUSIONS: As far as we are aware, the proposed scoping review will be the first to provide comprehensive methodological or technical guidance for conducting walkshed analysis specific to persons living with dementia. Both the scalability and objective nature of walkshed analysis are likely to be of direct interest to public health practitioners, planners, and allied professionals. Clearly documenting methods used in walkshed analysis can spur increased collaboration across these disciplines to enable an evidence-informed approach to improving neighborhood environments for persons living with dementia. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/50548.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | low |
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 | 0.026 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".