Influence of personalised citizen assistance for social participation (APIC) on health, social participation, and life satisfaction: Perspectives from older adults and attendants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The personalised citizen assistance for social participation (APIC) is promising to foster health and social participation of older adults with disabilities, especially when working in collaboration with occupational therapists. When implemented by community organisations, little is known about the influence of APIC on older adults, including perspectives of older adults and attendants. This study aimed to explore the short-term influence of APIC on physical and mental health, social participation, and life satisfaction of older adults with disabilities by considering the perspectives of older adults and their attendant. METHODS: A mixed methods study was carried out by a team, including two occupational therapists. Twelve attendants were interviewed, and 12 older adults completed questionnaires about their health, social participation, and life satisfaction before and after the APIC. RESULTS: Improvements in mental health, social participation, and life satisfaction were found. The influence of APIC was generally more subtle than expected and greatly affected by older adults' personal and environmental factors. CONSUMER AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT: This study was possible because of the collaboration between researchers, health-care professionals, community organisations, volunteers, and older adults. CONCLUSION: The APIC might have a limited influence on the physical health of older adults with disabilities. Future studies examining the effects of this intervention on different levels of disabilities are recommended to target the best suited population. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The personalised citizen assistance for social participation (APIC) is a 12-month intervention in which an older adult with disabilities (i.e., having difficulty to perform daily activities) meets weekly with a volunteer to experiment social activities. Although promising, little is known about the influence of APIC on older adults. This study explores the influence of APIC on the health, social participation (i.e., involvement in activities that provide interactions with others), and life satisfaction of older adults with disabilities. The perspective of 12 older adults and 12 volunteers were considered. Improvements in mental health, social participation, and life satisfaction of older adults were observed, but the influence of APIC was greatly affected by other factors such as their physical capabilities and their place of residence. APIC seems to have a limited influence on the physical health of older adults with disabilities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".