Navigating the Digital Divide: Exploring the Drivers, Drawbacks, and Prospects of Social Interaction Technologies′ Adoption and Usage Among Older Adults During COVID‐19
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the critical role of social interaction technologies (SITs) in mitigating loneliness and social isolation, particularly among older adults. However, challenges such as the digital divide, physical and cognitive declines, and digital literacy gaps persist. This article seeks to explore the drivers, drawbacks, and prospects of SITs' adoption during the pandemic. The paper employs a narrative review approach, using targeted phrases and keywords, including "COVID-19 pandemic and digital engagement," "digital technologies usage among older adults/people during COVID-19," and "drivers of digital technologies adoption among older adults/people during COVID-19." Articles were retrieved through Google Scholar searches conducted between October 2023 and December 2024. In line with key findings, we propose evidence-based recommendations, including user-centered digital communication technology design, the need to balance digital engagement with healthy physical activity, and personalized digital literacy programs, to enhance SITs' accessibility and usability 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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it