Comparing Social Isolation in Older Adults With and Without Physical Health Challenges During COVID-19: Church and Church Friends Matter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Older adults were disproportionately affected by COVID-19. The purpose of this study was to explore experiences of sudden-onset social isolation and factors that influenced it among social isolation in two groups of older adults. A qualitative thematic study with a survey component was conducted comparing 18 older adults in two groups: 12 reporting physical health challenges and 6 reporting no physical health challenges. Three qualitative themes describe experiences of (a) avoiding risk to personal health as the reason to postpone healthcare, (b) grieving church and church friends as a lost social connection, and (c) compound stress due to converging factors related to personal health, public health, racial justice movement and critical national events. Those with physical health challenges were less able to postpone seeking healthcare, suffered from compound stress, and were more likely to feel isolated when unable to participate in church activities. Religious, faith, or spiritual supports may be important buffers against social isolation during public health emergencies, especially for older adults with physical health challenges and when there is concurrent social unrest.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".