MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1866012721 · doi:10.6000/1927-5129.2015.11.54

Demographic and Anthropometric Variables Related to Longevity: Results from a Greek Centenarians’ Study

2015· article· en· W1866012721 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christina Darviri, Panagiotis Pelekasis, Michael Galanakis, Xanthi Tigani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Basic & Applied Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLongevityCentenarianGerontologySuccessful agingPsychologyHealthy agingPerspective (graphical)DemographyMedicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Centenarian research contributes to expanding our knowledge on longevity and healthy aging. In Greece, a variety of studies have been conducted in order to explore exceptional longevity. This is a retrospective study of 106 centenarians employing both quantitative and qualitative measures in order to explore centenarians own perspective on longevity. Basic socio demographic and life style variables where associated with centenarians beliefs and perceptions about their longevity. The majority of centenarians attributed their longevity to God and to living a good life overall. God and social networks were reported as their main source of strength in order to continue living. Gender differences were also evident as male centenarians reported non abusive behaviors and a sense of having a measure in daily living, as well as nutrition as their main source of longevity, while female emphasized on God and social networks. Gender differences on Body Mass Index and Smoking are also evident. Centenarians own perception of longevity could be further explored and findings could be incorporated in future research and intervention programs aiming at healthy longevity.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.424

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Basic & Applied SciencesSame topicAging and Gerontology ResearchFrench-language works237,207