MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7065843510

An examination of older adults’ social experiences predicting physical activity and psychological well-being trajectories during the COVID-19 pandemic

2023· article· en· W7065843510 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)Physical activityLatent growth modelingQuadratic modelSocial supportPandemicClosure (psychology)Social distance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many older adults’ social experiences, physical activity (PA), and psychological well-being (PWB) were negatively impacted during COVID-19. We examined associations between social experiences and trajectories of PA and PWB during a period when public health restrictions were changing. 890 older adults (Mage = 65 years) responded to six monthly questionnaires. Latent growth curve models demonstrated good fit. Consistent with hypotheses, results indicated a significant (p ≤ .05) decline in stress, with higher descriptive norms associated with greater declines. Negative affect declined, but unexpectedly higher social participation was associated with slower declines. Positive affect and light PA had a quadratic trajectory where they declined, the rate of decline slowed, and they then increased again. Unexpectedly, higher social participation was associated with greater declines in positive affect. There were no predictors of change in light PA. MVPA declined from time 1-3 then increased, with a quadratic effect where the rate of increase slowed over time. The slowing rate of increase in MVPA was negatively predicted by social network size: those with larger social networks slowed their rate of increase of MVPA from time 4-6 more quickly. Findings indicate that while some social experiences were associated with adaptive outcomes, others may have presented vulnerabilities (e.g., greater social participation prior to periods of program closure may have been associated with less desirable changes in affect because they had more to lose). Further research on how the trajectories of social experiences and outcomes, PA, and PWB are associated may further elucidate these dynamic relationships.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207