Perceptions and implications of received spousal care: Evidence from the Caregiver Health Effects Study.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The experiences of older care recipients have received far less theoretical and empirical attention than those of their family caregivers. In this study of 91 care recipients, the authors assessed perceptions of the amount, timing, and manner of spousal assistance; the amount of strain experienced from receiving care; and psychological well-being. Although female care recipients were more likely to report dissatisfaction with the manner in which assistance was provided, there were few gender differences in perceptions of care overall. In a stringent test of the hypothesis that perceived quality of spousal care affects recipient well-being, the authors found that poorer quality of care was related to increased depressive symptoms and a decreased sense of mastery 1 year later. These longitudinal effects were independent of the recipient's physical disability, marital quality, and care-receiving strain as well as the caregiver's well-being. These findings argue for a comprehensive assessment of the care-receiving experience that includes both care-recipient and caregiver perspectives.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it