Social Participation of Marginalized Older Adults: Influence of Urban Context and Social Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To optimally promote health, it is essential to better consider the heterogeneity of older adults, especially in a context of a revitalization that can lead to various forms of gentrification and exacerbate the social exclusion of those at risk of marginalization. Using a participatory action research design, this study aimed to describe and explore the influence of three actions to foster the social participation of 20 older adults at risk of marginalization in a revitalizing urban city center. Guided tours of the local library were organized to share information about services and activities aimed at seniors and to help the library develop its tour offerings. Co-designed by, for, and with residents, 5 coffee meetings were held to provide older women living in a downtown low-income housing building with an opportunity to gather, access information, rebuild connections, and engage socially. Finally, in collaboration with the local fine arts museum, 4 artistic mediation workshops were implemented in the same building to increase participants’ social participation through various artistic techniques and to enable the museum to establish initial contact with a population that rarely attends its activities. The effects of these actions were explored through questionnaires and focus groups with older adults and stakeholders. The results highlight the importance of considering social dimensions during revitalization. Beyond physical improvements, it is crucial to integrate accessible and sustainable actions tailored to the abilities and needs of older adults at risk of marginalization, fostering a sense of community belonging and social participation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".