THE GLOBAL PRIDE STUDY: LESSONS LEARNED AND NEXT STEPS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract As the older adult population becomes increasingly diverse and globalized, new challenges emerge in gerontological research and practice worldwide. This presentation examines sexuality, gender, and aging within a global context, exploring both fortitude and risks, as well as differing social and cultural interpretation of sexuality, gender, and age in relation to research and the development of culturally relevant practices. We will discuss the formation of the research network, involving more than 50 international collaborators. As part of the Global Pride project, we developed and tested a pilot survey, which was distributed by 18 partners and completed across six global regions (N= 3,885). Key processes and lessons learned include: 1. Establishing an international network of researchers to exchange knowledge and experiences in studying sexuality, gender, longevity, and health holistically; 2. Implementing a collaboratively developed survey across six global regions, taking into consideration differing cultural contexts and methodologies; 3. Employing culturally tailored dissemination strategies across diverse regions and settings. The insights gleaned from this research will deepen an awareness of the diversity of lives across the life course and contribute knowledge about the richness, challenges, and heterogeneity of ageing, as well as best practices for the implementation of global research.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".