MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402444115 · doi:10.3390/geriatrics9050117

Embracing Connection: A Review of First-Ever Clinical Guidelines on Social Isolation and Loneliness in Older Adults

2024· review· en· W4402444115 on OpenAlexaffabout
Peter Hoang, David Bruce Conn

Bibliographic record

VenueGeriatrics · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences NorthBaycrest HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLonelinessMedicineSocial isolationIsolation (microbiology)Connection (principal bundle)GerontologyPsychiatryBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social isolation and loneliness are major public health concerns and are associated with morbidity and mortality. As this is an increasing issue in older adults, guidance for healthcare providers is a priority. The Canadian Coalition for Senior's Mental Health (CCSMH) has developed the first Canadian social isolation and loneliness guidelines to help providers recognize, assess, and manage social isolation and loneliness among older adults. We review and summarize these guidelines to support healthcare and social service providers to apply best practices and evidence-based care for older adults experiencing social isolation and loneliness.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.759

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.182
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.318 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeriatricsSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207