MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7008773682

Case study research:Examining a Chinese older adult’s resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic from a life course perspective

2024· article· en· W7008773682 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch portal (Tilburg University) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLife course approachPerspective (graphical)Thematic analysisReflexivityPandemicPsychological resiliencePsychological interventionResilience (materials science)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic posed significant challenges, yet many older adults demonstrated resilience. This case study research with a community-dwelling Chinese immigrant woman known as Mary, examines her resilience during the pandemic and was informed by interviews and observations completed over three years. Using reflexive thematic analyses, we identified six key themes of her resilience: acceptance, spirituality, keeping physically active, strong family bonds and support, perseverance in learning, and reciprocal exchange of social support. The findings demonstrate that a life course perspective contributes to our understanding of how resilience achieved from experiencing previous events and conditions can be manifested during the recent COVID-19 pandemic. The single case study offers valuable insights for gerontological nurses where interventions in care might be to support and facilitate the abilities and strengths of older adults who have endured, responded to and tackled previous challenges, and who have brought this resilience into their old age.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.178
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch portal (Tilburg University)Same topicResilience and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207