Occupational Participation Among Older Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background . The COVID-19 pandemic led to abrupt occupational disruption for all people. However, some populations, like older adults, were disproportionately impacted particularly in the earlier waves. Purpose. The purpose of this study was to explore and understand how the occupational participation of community-dwelling older adults was experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, using the Canadian Model of Occupational Participation (CanMOP) to contextualize findings. Method. Sixty-seven older adults participated in semi-structured interviews from September 2020 to May 2021, 37 of which also participated in a follow-up interview one-year later. Findings. Using reflexive thematic analysis, four themes were generated: (1) experiences of loss are complex and layered for older adults, (2) technology as a medium for occupational participation, (3) risk perception influences return to occupation, and (4) age-related challenges for older adults resuming volunteer work. Conclusion. Increasing frequency and severity of influenza pandemics and other disasters are a global concern, and OTs can use their skillsets to foster participation and expand occupational possibilities for older adults. The CanMOP was a helpful tool to understand the nuances underlying the participation of older adults in this context.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".