MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405960477 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igae098.0626

BARRIERS TO ACCESS HEALTH AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES AMONG SOUTH ASIAN OLDER ADULTS

2024· article· en· W4405960477 on OpenAlexaffabout
Janki Shankar, Papiya Das

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthGerontologyEnvironmental healthPsychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Research on older immigrants in Canada is in its infancy despite their growing numbers. In 2019, Covenant Health, one of the largest healthcare providers in Canada, in partnership with the Indo-Canadian Women’s Association, a non-government service organization for new immigrants, in Edmonton, conducted a community consultation with South Asian older adults to understand their health and mental care needs and barriers to their access. The consultation was based on anecdotal evidence that South Asian older adults make poor use of health care services in general and mental health care services in particular. Focus groups and individual interviews with older adults were used to gather information, and the data were analyzed using thematic analysis. The results showed that a significant number of South Asian older adults lead marginalized and isolated lives within their community. Lack of language skills, transportation difficulties, poor knowledge of health care services, financial dependence on sponsors, and adherence to traditional beliefs about health and mental health services are some of the barriers to accessing services. Based on these findings, several recommendations are suggested to improve healthcare access for older adults.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.272
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.356 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in Aging→Same topicHealth disparities and outcomes→French-language works237,207→