MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414304607 · doi:10.1080/23748834.2025.2552561

Social participation needs of older adults in an urban revitalization: results from participatory action research during the COVID-19 pandemic

2025· article· en· W4414304607 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mélanie Levasseur, Martine Shareck, Ruth Ndjaboué, Louis Braverman, Joanie Lacasse‐Bédard, Agathe Chaintre Prieur, Mélissa Généreux, Sébastien Lord, Stéphanie Meynet

Bibliographic record

VenueCities & Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité LavalCentres Intégré Universitaires de Santé et de Services SociauxCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-JeanCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsParticipatory action researchPandemicAction (physics)Social engagementCommunity participationPublic participationCitizen journalismPhotovoice

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adults aged 80 or older, with a low income, with a disability, or belonging to ethnic, linguistic, sexual or gender minorities are particularly at risk of exclusion, especially during neighborhood revitalizations and pandemics. This study aimed to document individual and collective needs, facilitators and barriers to social participation of older residents and users of downtown Sherbrooke (Quebec, Canada) at risk of marginalization during an urban revitalization. We used a participatory action research design with 32 older adults, 1 caregiver and 5 community partners. Participants expressed high expectations regarding the downtown revitalization. Individual and collective social participation needs were identified, particularly relating to inclusive environments, i.e. adapted, safe, clean and healthy; with access to activities, resources, affordable transportation and housing; accompanied to participate in activities; and informed about social participation opportunities. Main facilitators were health, income, public space designed to promote social interaction, activities offered, assistance of family and friends, and security. Obstacles were disabilities, precarious living conditions, COVID-19 restrictions and discrimination. The pandemic made collaborative research difficult, which triggered new strategies (e.g. media watch, research newsletter). Results could improve the development of a downtown area, inclusive for all older adults, and inspire future projects to leverage the power of communities.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.362
Threshold uncertainty score0.720

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.271
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCities & HealthSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207