MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115038916

The Applications and Effects of Emerging Innovative Technology in the Mental Healthcare and Well-Being of Older Adults

2024· dissertation· en· W7115038916 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthcareHealth careMental healthMental health careMEDLINEContext (archaeology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Older adults frequently experience mental health challenges such as stress, loneliness, and depression.Since COVID-19, there has been great interest in technological approaches to improve health outcomes in older adults.This manuscript-based thesis describes three papers related to applications of telehealth, artificial intelligence (AI), and virtual reality (VR) to improve the health of older adults, especially their mental health.Firstly, it aims to lay the groundwork for integrating telehealth and technology applications into psychiatry and healthcare tailored for older adults.Secondly, it introduces a pioneering virtual reality-assisted mindfulness meditation (VR-Mindfulness) program designed for older adults, aiming to investigate its feasibility and efficacy.Methods: Study 1 is a Systematic Review of telehealth for older adults with dementia.Study 2 is a secondary data analysis of a large Canadian database examining whether older adults are comfortable with AI as part of their health care.Study 3 is a randomized controlled trial (RCT, n=22) of a 4-week VR-Mindfulness program 15 minutes/session, 2 times/week vs. waitlist control for older adults (≥ 60 years old) in Montreal, Canada, to investigate changes in mental health outcomes.Results: Study 1: This systematic review found that telemedicine was a feasible and efficacious approach in people with dementia.Study 2: Older adults have an overall positive perception of utilizing AI in different areas of healthcare.Study 3: The RCT demonstrated feasibility, with 75% of the intervention group and 92.8% of the control group completing both assessments.Technological issues were minimal and promptly resolved.

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)0.016
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.268 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207