MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417201948 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0338322

Social determinants of health and dual sensory loss in older adults: A scoping review

2025· review· en· W4417201948 on OpenAlexaff
Abinethaa Paramasivam, Ved Hatolkar, Renu Minhas, Aswen Sriranganathan, Pineal Bareamichael, Atul Jaiswal, Walter Wittich

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)Social determinants of healthSocial supportWarrantDual (grammatical number)Social vulnerabilityMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Social determinants of health (SDH), such as socioeconomic status, education, healthcare access, and social support, play a significant role in shaping individuals lived experiences. Dual sensory loss (DSL), a distinct disability involving both vision and hearing loss, poses greater challenges for daily living compared to the general population. This scoping review synthesized evidence on how various SDH indicators influence the life experiences of older adults with DSL. METHODS: Five scientific databases were searched from January 2014 to May 2024. Articles focusing on individuals aged 60 and older with DSL, in the context of at least one SDH indicator, were included. RESULTS: A total of 69 studies met the eligibility criteria. Most studies addressed the following SDH indicators: disability (n = 46), social inclusion and non-discrimination (n = 21), gender (n = 10), and access to healthcare services (n = 9). Disability-related indicators revealed higher risks of mobility limitations, cognitive decline, depression, anxiety, social isolation, and workplace discrimination, all adversely affecting mental health and quality of life. Older adults with DSL encounter significant barriers to accessing healthcare, such as absence of adequate assistive devices, communication challenges, and high healthcare costs. Many report dissatisfaction with the quality of care received. CONCLUSIONS: Our review identifies disparities that increase the vulnerability of older adults with DSL and restrict their access to healthcare, rehabilitation, and social participation. These findings warrant further research on underexplored SDH factors, using robust data sources that collects information on the lived experiences of older adults with DSL. Addressing these social determinants requires a comprehensive approach, including raising awareness, improving service access, enhancing social support networks, and ensuring inclusive policies and practices.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0130.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.295
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
GenreReview

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicAssistive Technology in Communication and MobilityFrench-language works237,207