MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7115815955

SOCIAL EXCLUSION AMONG OLDER WOMEN IN RURAL CANADA

2019· dissertation· en· W7115815955 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMacSphere (McMaster University) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial exclusionDisadvantageQualitative researchContext (archaeology)Social determinants of healthDisadvantagedRural areaLife course approachHealth equityPopulation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: There is a burgeoning population of older adults globally and there is an increasing urgency in the policy literature to understand the health issues facing this population. A social exclusion lens provides an opportunity to understand health inequity and disadvantage among vulnerable populations. There is limited research examining how social exclusion plays out for older women, particularly in the rural context. This study examines the social exclusion experiences of Canadian, rural, older women and highlights policy implications for global health practitioners. Methods: Guided by the principles of interpretive description, this qualitative study included eight participants who identified as women, 65 years or older, spoke English, and who lived alone in private households in rural communities of Durham Region, Ontario. Concurrent data collection and analysis was conducted using an inductive approach. One-to-one, semi-structured interviews were completed. Findings: Six themes illuminate the exclusion experiences of rural, older women and they include: “Expectations of ageing in rural communities”; “Navigating the tensions of belonging within the social fabric”; “Singlehood isolation”; “Driving independence”; “Health infrastructure and changing personal health”; “Affording ageing”. Implications & Contributions: The study adds a Canadian, rural perspective to the global conceptual literature on social exclusion. It illuminates the unique ways in which female gender and rural context influence social exclusion experiences. Implications for global health policy include: recognizing health as a key category of exclusion and the need to address health equity, adopt a gender-specific and life-course approach to address social exclusion, foster a sense of belonging and peer connection, utilize unconventional channels for engagement, implement social support schemes and health programming which considers non-traditional families or single status as norm for family composition, and support affordable access to health-promoting programs and services.

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)0.003
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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0210.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacSphere (McMaster University)→Same topicHealth disparities and outcomes→French-language works237,207→