EXPLORING THE NEIGHBORHOOD ENVIRONMENT’S ROLE IN OUTDOOR WALKING EXPERIENCES OF PEOPLE LIVING WITH DEMENTIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This presentation is based on a study that explores how people with dementia experience their neighborhood environment in the context of everyday outdoor walking. The experientially grounded approach explored ways in which people living with dementia can inform the process of dementia-friendly and inclusive planning and design. The focus on lived experience can also help planners and designers gain insights into the actions and strategies that people living with dementia adopt to cope with challenges in mobility and navigation in the neighborhood, thus gaining useful knowledge to generate contextually relevant design solutions. Four-part sequential sit-down and video-documented walk-along interviews were conducted with 32 participants living with mild to moderate dementia or mild cognitive impairment in British Columbia, Canada. Thematic analysis of interview transcripts and videos helped identify themes relevant to the ways in which the neighborhood environment shaped participants’ outdoor walking experiences. Findings underscored both supportive and constraining aspects of the neighborhood environment as it pertains to outdoor walking. Awareness of environmental barriers and stressors in the context of their physical and cognitive challenges informed participants’ planning and decision-making processes in relation to outdoor walks, as well as coping strategies to enhance familiarity, safety, comfort, and independence in the neighborhood environment. Planning and designing supportive built environments is key to facilitating the outdoor mobility of people living with dementia and should be a focus of research, policy, and practice related to building dementia-inclusive communities.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".