Psychosocial factors impacting rural oldest-old adults’ quality of life while aging in place
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In British Columbia, Canada, older adults make up 40% of the rural populous.Rural communities have been reported to have reduced quantity and accessibility to formal services and supports in comparison to their urban counterparts.With the anticipated increase of older adult populations in Canada and recent implications from the COVID-19 pandemic, determining programs and policies to support older adults aging in the community with reduced access is vital to their quality of life.To address this, two project objectives are completed through this capstone project.The first is a scoping review, which identifies recent empirical literature focused on psychosocial factors, and the characteristics of these processes, related to aging in place for urban and rural older adults.The term psychosocial, is defined as individual, social and environmental processes that impact behaviour.Three themes related to psychosocial processes and aging in place were identified, (1) social connections, (2) continuity and sense of identity and, (3) independence, safety and security.Time and familiarity are key characteristics related to these processes.Limited research was found addressing rural oldest-old (age 80 years or older) community-dwelling older adults and how the presence of psychosocial factors may impact or relate to their quality-of-life aging in place.To address this gap in literature, a CIHR project grant research proposal is presented to study (1) the lived experience of oldest-old adults residing in rural communities in British Columbia and (2) how psychosocial factors may impact or relate to this group of older adults' experience aging in place or quality of life.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".