MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406798841 · doi:10.12688/hrbopenres.14019.1

Addressing Age-Related Complexity in Intellectual Disability (AARC-ID): an economic analysis of different support models. Study protocol.

2025· preprint· en· W4406798841 on OpenAlexaff
Ashleigh Gorman, Tony O’Brien, Peter May, Irina Kinchin, Philip McCallion, Mary McCarron, Caitríona M. Ryan, Helena Connors, Sarah Craig, Louise Daly, Alison Harnett, Fintan Sheerin, Mei Lin Yap, Samantha Smith, Mary-Ann O’Donovan, Martin J. McMahon

Bibliographic record

VenueHRB Open Research · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
FundersHealth Research Board
KeywordsProtocol (science)Intellectual disabilityComputer sciencePsychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

People with intellectual disability are living longer. While this is a positive development, it may mean living with age-related morbidities which require specialist care to meet needs. While most people with intellectual disability would prefer to remain living in their current homes, if extra supports are not available, they may experience a need to move into residential type settings such as nursing homes. This is usually related to current funding systems not being responsive to developing age-related needs of people with intellectual disability. For example, if a person had been living independently but they are developing mobility issues, there is often no extra budget for staff to assist them. This can result in the person having to move to a different setting to have their needs met. However, such a move may impact on quality of life, wellbeing and personal dignity. This study will build a picture of the future needs of people who are ageing with intellectual disability, what extra supports they require, and the costs of those supports. This will be completed using two secondary data sources– the Intellectual Disability Supplement to the Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (IDS-TILDA) and the National Ability Support System (NASS), as well as collecting primary qualitative data to understand perspectives and experiences. The overall aim of the study is to provide economic evidence on the needs, resources and outcomes associated with supporting people aged ≥40 with intellectual disability to age in place. Data from 15 years of IDS-TILDA, the NASS and Health Service Executive costing calculations are available. Using a variety of analytical methods, levels of support will be defined alongside potential economic and policy scenarios. This research will provide evidence to inform policy such that more people with intellectual disability can continue to age at home rather than enter nursing homes.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.007
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1260.007

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 head0.828
GPT teacher head0.636
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHRB Open ResearchSame topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207