MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

‘Mind the gap’: tensions, transitions and tactics in Canadian and Norwegian community services for older adults

2024· article· en· W4402717924 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Gudmund Ågotnes, Tamara Daly, Jacqueline Choiniere, Bodil H. Blix

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Care and Caring · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersFederation for the Humanities and Social Sciences
KeywordsNorwegianPsychologyGerontologyPolitical sciencePublic relationsSociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article compares community services provided to older adults living in Bergen, Norway, and Toronto, Canada. We investigate the gaps that are left unattended in the respective jurisdictions and consequently maintained by the organizations. Our findings reveal the importance of community organizations in positively influencing the initial transition from independence to needing more supports. Our findings show differences between the jurisdictions in the experiences of care gaps for diverse groups of providers and clients, while the overall importance of community organizations for older adults is shared in both jurisdictions, particularly by filling gaps between the formal and informal care systems.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Care and CaringSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207