MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389992414 · doi:10.7202/1108106ar

Old age and disability: Same or different for the purposes of human rights law?

2023· article· en· W4389992414 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nena Georgantzi

Bibliographic record

VenueAequitas Revue de développement humain handicap et changement social · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic rentWelfare economicsHumanitiesPolitical scienceEconomicsPhilosophyMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ageing and disability are often conflated in theory and practice when old age is seen as synonym to physical and cognitive decline. But distinct policies, advocacy frames and movements have also led to the exclusion and discrimination of older people with disabilities, when older people are offered fewer and poorer services. In both cases, persistent stereotypes about older people’s abilities lead to the conclusion that there is not much that can be done to assist older people and to integrate them in the life of their communities. International human rights law also reflects age biases as it is at least partly based on a medical model that accepts old age impairments as natural and inevitable. This paper makes the case for a rights-based approach to ageing and argues that the intersection between old age and disability merits further consideration by international human rights law and practice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.061
Scholarly communication0.0150.020
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0130.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.155
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAequitas Revue de développement humain handicap et changement socialSame topicAging, Elder Care, and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207