MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968646045 · doi:10.1017/s1041610202008013

Measuring Psychological Well-Being in the Canadian Study of Health and Aging

2001· article· en· W1968646045 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Psychogeriatrics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsInstitute of AgingUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyInternal consistencySuccessful agingConfirmatory factor analysisReliability (semiconductor)Clinical psychologyDementiaCognitionPsychological well-beingMeasure (data warehouse)GerontologyPsychometricsStructural equation modelingMedicinePsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CHSA) provided an opportunity to examine the positive aspects of aging. CHSA-2 included the 18-item Ryff multidimensional measure of well-being, which taps six core theoretical dimensions of positive psychological functioning. The measure was administered to 4,960 seniors without severe cognitive impairment or dementia at CSHA-2. Intercorrelations across scales were generally low. At the same time, the internal consistency reliability of each of the 6 subscales was not found to be high. Confirmatory factor analyses provide support for a 6-factor model, although some items demonstrate poor factor loadings. The well-being measures in CSHA-2 provide an opportunity to examine broad, descriptive patterns of well-being in Canadian seniors.

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 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)0.002
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 score0.178
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.308 · 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