Social Isolation in Racialized and Ethnic Minority Older Adults with Dementia in Canada: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social isolation is a growing public health concern for older adults, with a majority of older adults reporting loneliness. It is also a risk factor for dementia. People living with dementia, in contrast to the general population, face additional barriers that exacerbate existing social isolation. This scoping review will fill research gaps by discussing the unique, intersectional experiences of racialized ethnic minority Canadians, as most reviews on social isolation focus on the general population of Canadians with dementia, and there is a current lack of resources for the specific needs of racially diverse older adults living with dementia in Canada. The objective of this scoping review is to examine what is in the existing literature about the connection between racialization or ethnicity and social isolation among older adults living with dementia in Canada. This scoping review will use Arksey and O’Malley’s (2005) methodological framework and Tricco et al.’s (2018) PRISMA-ScR checklist. Seven databases will be searched: CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science. Grey literature from prominent Canadian sources, such as the Alzheimer Society of Canada and the National Institute on Ageing, will be collected. The inclusion criteria are: any dementia, Canadian context, conjoint analysis of social isolation and race or culture, discussion on older adults, English language, and published at any time. Data will be screened with Covidence, and manually extracted and thematically analyzed. Ethics approval is not necessary as only existing published literature will be used. This study will be disseminated through open-access repositories, such as Open Science Framework.
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 | 0.013 | 0.057 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.020 | 0.030 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".