Dual Sensory Impairment as a Predictor of Loneliness and Isolation in Older Adults: National Cohort Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Loneliness and social isolation are global public health challenges. Sensory impairments (SIs) are highly prevalent among older adults but are often ignored as a part of normal aging. Identifying the role of SIs in loneliness and social isolation could provide insight into strategies for improving public health among older adults. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to analyze the effects of SIs on loneliness and social isolation among older adults in rural and urban China. METHODS: This cohort study of 3069 older adults (aged 60+) used data from 4 waves (2011, 2013, 2015, and 2018) of the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS), a nationally representative survey of adults aged 45 years or older. SIs include hearing impairment (HI), vision impairment (VI), and dual sensory impairment (DSI). DSI is defined as the co-occurrence of VI and HI. Participants with complete data on hearing, vision, social isolation, and loneliness were included in the analysis. Generalized estimating equation models adjusted for covariates were used to examine the relationships of DSI with loneliness and social isolation among older adults. RESULTS: Older adults in rural areas have higher prevalence of DSI, loneliness, and social isolation than their urban counterparts. In rural areas, participants with VI only (odds ratio [OR] 1.34, 95% CI 1.12-1.62; P=.002), HI only (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.02-1.71; P=.03), and DSI (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.56-2.18; P<.001) were more likely to experience loneliness compared with participants without SIs. DSI showed a statistically significant association with loneliness compared with VI only (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.22-1.54; P<.001) and HI only (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.13-1.72; P=.002). In urban areas, participants with VI only (OR 2.44, 95% CI 1.57-3.80; P<.001), HI only (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.41-4.32; P=.002), and DSI (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.24-2.85; P=.003) were more likely to experience loneliness compared with participants without SIs. DSI was not associated with the increased likelihood of loneliness compared with HI only or VI only. SIs were not associated with social isolation among older adults in urban and rural areas. Until 2018, 86.97% (2669/3069) reported VI, but only 27.11% (832/3069) and 9.45% (290/3069) were treated with glasses and cataract surgery, respectively; besides, 75 individuals received both glasses and cataract surgery treatment. The prevalence of HI was 74.39% (2283/3069) in 2018, but only 0.72% (22/3069) were treated with a hearing aid. CONCLUSIONS: SIs are associated with an increased risk of loneliness rather than social isolation. A compounded risk of DSI on loneliness exists in rural areas rather than in urban areas. These findings expand our knowledge about the effects of SIs on loneliness and social isolation in non-Western populations. Interventions targeting HI only and DSI might be particularly effective for mitigating loneliness of older adults in urban and rural areas, respectively. Considering the high prevalence and low treatment rate of SIs, measures should be taken to make treatment more accessible.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».