MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411360783 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0325306

Pandemic-related experiences of older adults and people with disabilities

2025· article· en· W4411360783 on OpenAlexaffabout
W. Ben Mortenson, Elham Esfandiari, Somayyeh Mohammadi, Brodie M. Sakakibara, Julia Schmidt, Ethan Simpson, Janice Chan, Holly Reid, Isabelle Rash, Emily Brooks, Gordon Tao, Quinn Krahn, Jessica Irish, Susan Forwell, Catherine L. Backman, Jaimie Borisoff, Nicole Ketter, Natalie Yu, William C. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElder Abuse and Neglect
Canadian institutionsInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesBritish Columbia Institute of TechnologyGF Strong Rehabilitation CentreCanadian Association of Occupational TherapistsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychologyGerontologyTheme (computing)Face (sociological concept)Young adultMedicineSociologyDiseaseComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic has had wide reaching effects especially for people with disabilities. Drawing on Sen's Capability approach, we explored experiences of people with disabilities and older adults using semi-structured interviews that were conducted three to four months after the pandemic was declared. We recruited 71 adults from British Columbia, Canada: adults with spinal cord injuries (n = 22), adults who have experienced a stroke (n = 26), adults with general disabilities (n = 13), and older adults (over the age of 65) without reported disabilities (n = 10). Our analysis identified one overarching theme: "navigating the new normal: the societal reconfiguration of functionings and capabilities" described the challenges and successes participants experienced during pandemic-related restrictions and regulations. This theme encapsulated three sub-themes: 1) "Trying to stay connected: resuming functionings via alternative means," 2) "Worrying about future capability opportunities," and 3) "Wanting to exert control in the face of constrained capabilities." The pandemic created unique challenges for people with disabilities. The capability approach appears to be a helpful lens to interpret pandemic restrictions among people with disabilities, which could inform future policy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.241

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicElder Abuse and NeglectFrench-language works237,207