The effect of social relationships on survival in elderly residents of a Southern European community: a cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Comparative evidence regarding the effects of social relationships on mortality in Mediterranean communities will increase our knowledge of their strengths and the ways in which they influence longevity across cultures. Men and women may benefit differently from social relationships because of cultural differences in gender roles. Psychosocial mechanisms such as social support, which may explain the effects of social networks, may also vary by culture. METHODS: Detailed information on the social relationships of a representative sample of 1,174 community-dwelling older adults was collected in Leganés, a city in central Spain. Mortality over a 6-year follow-up period was ascertained. Information on socio-demographic, health and disability variables was also collected. Cox proportional hazards models were fitted separately for men and women and for the combined sample. RESULTS: Having a confidant was associated with a 25% (95% CI 5-40%) reduction in the mortality risk. The hazard ratio for lack of social participation was 1.5 (95% CI 1.3-1.7). Being engaged in meaningful roles protected against mortality, while receipt of emotional support did not affect survival. These results were comparable for men and women. Having contact with all family ties was associated with reduced mortality only in men. Structural aspects of social networks make a unique contribution to survival, independently of emotional support and the role played in the lives of significant others. CONCLUSION: In this elderly Southern European population, the beneficial effects of social networks, social participation, engagement in the life of significant others and having a confidant call for public policies that foster intergenerational and community exchanges.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".