MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392176399 · doi:10.46692/9781447357315.002

The problem of adult safeguarding

2023· other· en· W4392176399 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jeremy Dixon

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElder Abuse and Neglect
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSafeguardingComputer scienceMedicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction I qualified to be a social worker in England in 1998. During my time in training, nobody used the term ‘adult safeguarding’. The concept, as it is understood now, did not exist. This situation is very different from where we find ourselves today. Adult safeguarding is now seen as a central part of social work practice in England. The Care Act 2014 sets out the legal duties of local authorities, and social workers are often acutely aware of the law and policy. Adult safeguarding training is a core part of the social work curriculum. Also, there is increased public understanding of adult abuse and neglect (Yoeli et al, 2016). In the present day, it can be hard to understand why adult safeguarding was not seen as important for so long. And the ever-rising rate of adult safeguarding referrals and enquiries seems to attest to the fact that it is a problem of some scale (NHS Digital, 2022). This raises the question of how we got here and how safeguarding came to be understood in its current form. In this chapter, I consider how adult safeguarding has come to be viewed as an issue needing a policy response. Adult safeguarding or adult protection systems have evolved in several countries, including England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Canada and Australia (Donnelly et al, 2017) although here I limit myself to an analysis of the situation in England. While others have examined how adult safeguarding policy has evolved in relation to care homes and hospitals (Manthorpe and Stevens, 2015), my analysis is broader in range, focusing on all aspects of adult safeguarding. I begin by setting out a history which highlights how policy has developed, identifying campaigns, public inquiries, political discussion and policy developments from the 1960s to the Care Act 2014 and beyond. Abuse and neglect exist in all societies and are sometimes referred to as being ‘as old as time itself ‘. However, as Blumer (1971) states, some harms are identified as social problems, while others are not. Because of this, we need to understand how particular issues within society come to be seen as problems in need of policy response. In this chapter, I adopt what is known as a social constructionist position, meaning that I focus on how meaning and knowledge about adult safeguarding have evolved.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElder Abuse and NeglectFrench-language works237,207