Ageism Healthcare: Implications for the Psychological Well-Being of Atlantic Canadian Healthcare Professionals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ageism in healthcare is related to poor outcomes for older patients. The objective of this study was to evaluate the relationships between ageism and various aspects of the psychological well-being of healthcare professionals in Atlantic Canada. In 2023, an online survey of 294 healthcare professionals from various disciplines was conducted. This survey included items to measure expectations of aging, stress, burnout, emotional dissonance, and well-being. Results indicated that aging expectations were significantly related to burnout, perceived stress, well-being, and emotional dissonance. With the use of a path analysis, emotional dissonance partially mediated relationships between burnout and well-being with stress. However, aging expectations did not significantly predict emotional dissonance. Differences were found across professional groups on ageism. Conclusions support the need for increased awareness to the relationship between ageist attitudes and professionals' well-being, as well as the need for education and interventions to reduce false expectations about the aging process.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".