MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405976475 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igae098.0100

SOCIAL PARTICIPATION OF OLDER ADULTS AT RISK OF MARGINALIZATION: RESULTS FROM A SCOPING REVIEW OF INTERVENTIONS

2024· review· en· W4405976475 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphanie Meynet, Trang Nguyen, Alexia Alaux, Mélanie Levasseur

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionGerontologyPsychologyEnvironmental healthMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Considering demographic aging, it is essential to better consider the heterogeneity of older adults in promoting the health of all, especially by fostering social participation of the population at risk of marginalization and social exclusion. Despite vulnerability to isolation and loneliness this population, knowledge about social participation interventions lack integration, and this group is under-represented in studies. This study thus aimed to identify, describe, and integrate knowledge about interventions that foster the social participation of older adults at risk of marginalization and social exclusion. Using 61 keywords in 6 databases, a scoping review identified 24 studies that assessed the influence of interventions on older adults’ social participation, isolation, loneliness, social interactions, and social connectivity. While almost half of the interventions were individualized home-based, the others involved collective activities in the community. Most studies focused on older adults having low income, and only two studies documented interventions with older adults from minority groups of different gender identity or sexual orientation. Interpersonal relationships with peers, and free group activities based on older adults’ interests and life experience were identified as favoring social participation. Perceived isolation, lack of access to transportation and the diversity of older participants represented challenges to successful interventions. While some initiatives were promising, further studies are needed to better develop and evaluate these interventions including assess their efficacy for this population. Providing integrated knowledge on the current initiatives, this exploratory study is the first step towards better crafted interventions that support healthy aging and more inclusive societies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.323
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.374
GPT teacher head0.545
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207