Negotiating connections, confinements, and neighbourhood places: Older adults’ everyday well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• Material, relational, subjective, psychological, and environmental dimensions matter for well-being. • Home and neighbourhood characteristics were central to older adults’ well-being. • Home comforts, technology, and neighbourhood amenities enhanced participants’ well-being. • Confinement in insufficient homes and compounding factors diminished participants’ well-being. • Some participants grew fatigued and participated less in their neighbourhoods over time. The COVID-19 pandemic profoundly disrupted society and raised concerns about the well-being of older adults. Today, many people have abandoned ‘pandemic protocols’ but questions remain about the pandemic's longer term impacts on older adults. We used digitally mediated photovoice to explore older adults’ well-being in the context of their everyday lives, early in the pandemic and again two years later. Nine apartment-dwelling older adults who lived in high-density neighbourhoods in Vancouver, Canada participated in our study. We holistically considered how five dimensions of well-being were interrelated to shape experiences: material, relational, subjective, psychological, and environmental. We explored positive and negative aspects of these dimensions in relation to two key themes: (i) negotiating comfort, purpose and confinement at home, and (ii) navigating neighbourhood places amidst pandemic disruptions. Material resources to meet one's needs (e.g., communication technology, hobbies) and access to public and private greenspaces were assets. However, some participants experienced increased barriers to maintaining the five overlapping dimensions of well-being we examined; these participants viewed their homes negatively, and engaged less with their neighbourhoods over time. We emphasize how older adults’ well-being during the pandemic was a dynamic and, at times, precarious process. Understanding how interrelated dimensions shape older adult well-being might ultimately inform practices and policies that promote age-friendly cities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".