Associations Between Health-Related Self-Protection, Diurnal Cortisol, and C-Reactive Protein in Lonely Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine whether health-related self-protection (e.g., using positive reappraisals or avoiding self-blame) prevents lonely older adults from exhibiting increases in diurnal cortisol secretion and higher levels of C-reactive protein (CRP). METHODS: This longitudinal study (n = 122) examined diurnal cortisol levels (area under the curve) at baseline and 2-year follow-up. Levels of CRP were measured at 6-year follow-up. The main predictors included baseline levels of loneliness and health-related self-protection. RESULTS: Among lonely participants, baseline self-protection predicted an amelioration of 2-year increases in diurnal cortisol volume (β = -.34, p = .03) and lower levels of CRP at 6-year follow-up (β = -.42, p = .006). These significant associations were not found among nonlonely participants (β < .14, p = .33). In addition, mediation analyses demonstrated that the buffering effect of self-protection on lonely older adults' levels of CRP at 6-year follow-up was statistically mediated by 2-year changes in cortisol volume (β = -.16, p = .06). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that lonely older adults may ameliorate biologic disturbances if they engage in self-protection to cope with their health threats.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".