MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407538712 · doi:10.1177/00957984251319746

(Un)availability of Social Provisions and the Framing of Loneliness by Black Older Adults in Canada: A Qualitative Narrative Study

2025· article· en· W4407538712 on OpenAlexaffabout
Blessing Ugochi Ojembe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Black Psychology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLonelinessBelongingnessSocial isolationPsychologyNarrativeQualitative researchNarrative inquiryFraming (construction)PopulationSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyGerontologySociologyMedicineDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the severe implications of loneliness on racialized older adults’ well-being, little is known about this experience among Black older adults. This paper explores how Black older adults in Canada frame the (un)availability of different social provisions and their interplay with loneliness experiences, drawing on the firsthand experiences of 13 Black older adults ( n = 5 male and n = 8 female) with a mean age of 63.8, who were purposefully recruited using narrative inquiry methodology. Analysis of narratives by Black older adults revealed that getting involved with people, intimacy, and belongingness are crucial in establishing a reliable social provision. While many participants emphasized the critical role of social connections and reliable relationships in alleviating loneliness, disparities in access to these essential social ties were noted among Black older adults. This highlights the urgent need to establish more inclusive and supportive environments that effectively address loneliness and social isolation for this population.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.400 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Black PsychologySame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207