MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405960971 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igae098.0952

CREATING DESIGN CONNECTIONS: ARTS-BASED METHODS AS A PATHWAY INTO TRAUMA-INFORMED DESIGN FOR OLDER HOMELESS ADULTS

2024· article· en· W4405960971 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alison L. Grittner, Christine A. Walsh

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Therapy and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryCape Breton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe artsMedicinePsychologyArtVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Older adults who have experienced homelessness are more likely to live with trauma than their continually housed counterparts. Trauma-informed design (TID) recognizes that the built environment – defined as all physical elements that are human-made or curated to respond to human needs, desires, or purposes – impacts the physical, psychological, and emotional effects of trauma. TID seeks to positively shape this trauma-built environment connection through intentional design. While environmental gerontology has long understood the connection between aging well and the built environment, understanding trauma-informed design for aging adults is a new perspective. In this presentation, we explore the importance of collaborative and artful methodological strategies for understanding the TID needs of older adults with experiences of homelessness, generated by a secondary data analysis of 35 arts-based interviews with older adults (ages 50-71) living in four supportive housing sites in Calgary, Canada. We share our methods (photovoice and arts-based elicitation), examples of artful knowledge concerning the built environment created by research participants, and insights for translating art-based findings into design strategies, using our own research project as an exemplar. Overall, we demonstrate the possibilities of arts-based methods to understand, design, and create trauma-informed supportive housing for older adults with experiences of homelessness that fosters wellness, slows aging, and promotes healing from trauma.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.017
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0020.013
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in Aging→Same topicArt Therapy and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→