Learning from each other: identifying further needs for older adult programming at four Canadian Mental Health Association regional branches from the perspectives of front line staff
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this project is to review existing programs that are available to the older adult population aged 55 and over with Mental Health issues at four BC Canadian Mental Health Association (CMHA) branches, with a focus on service providers‟ perceptions of program opportunities. The selected branches include Vancouver-Fraser (CMHA-VF) branch, North and West Vancouver, Shuswap-Revelstoke, and Kelowna branches. The reason for conducting research on this topic is to determine what types of targeted programming might best support regional older adults with mental health concerns. Data was collected using FluidSurveys, and the survey questions allowed for both qualitative and quantitative data. The questions encouraged participants to share their views as front-line staff who work with clients, and what they determine to be effective programs for older adults versus in their view, and what they believe their agency may be able to benefit from, for future programming. Five thematic categories were developed from participants‟ feedback: stigma, education and outreach, leisure/recreational/social wellness programs, how to access resources and future older adult programming. These themes demonstrate not only the work front-line staff members are currently doing within the agency, but also areas of program development that are identified. A theoretical framework of Erik Erikson‟s life span development perspective, and exploring the various social determinants of health, provides a foundation for understanding why older adults experience social exclusion and are denied the opportunity to gain access to resources.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".