Telling Tales (Tails): Factors Associated with Older People’s Anxiety Symptom Positioning after COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study sheds light on personal characteristics of and the coping strategies that older Canadians self-identifying as severely anxious post-COVID-19 were more and less prone to gravitate to. Our studied sample consisted of 606 older people residing in 10 Canadian provinces. Participants completed the Geriatric Anxiety Scale – 10 and a personal checklist of everyday coping strategies for mitigating anxiety. Severely anxious older Canadians tended to be in their 60s, and in poor to fair health. They were not significantly more likely to be women or to be chronically ill, nor to self-identify as non-binary or as having a life partner. Older Canadians experiencing severe anxiety were, however, far more likely to normalize their fear and anxiety, challenge their worries, and to relax or meditate. They were less inclined to decrease other sources of stress in their lives, to stay active, and to get enough sleep. We offer anticipatory guidance for mental health program planners and practitioners, and researchers, fruitful avenues of inquiry.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".