MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989481442 · doi:10.1080/13607860801933414

Predicting longitudinal patterns of psychological distress in older husband caregivers: Further analysis of existing data

2008· article· en· W1989481442 on OpenAlexaff
Louise Lévesque, Francine Ducharme, Steven H. Zarit, Lise Lachance, Francine Giroux

Bibliographic record

VenueAging & Mental Health · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStressorDistressPsychological interventionPsychologyPsychological distressLongitudinal studyClinical psychologyLongitudinal dataMental healthPsychiatryMedicineDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Further analysis of existing data from a previous longitudinal study of older husband caregivers sought to determine whether primary objective and subjective stressors drawn from Pearlin's model of caregiving could predict three patterns of psychological distress observed in the sample over 1 year: (a) stable high (n=115), (b) stable low (n=44), and (c) rising (n=46). Results of discriminant function analyses show that subjective stressors (level of role overload, role captivity and relational deprivation) at baseline, distinguish the stable low group of husbands from the stable-high. The results suggest that there is considerable stability over time. Many husband caregivers report high-psychological distress and need help, whereas there is a need of preventive interventions to keep psychological distress low. Implications for singular interventions that target specific factors according to group membership are discussed.

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)0.001
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 score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations26
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAging & Mental HealthSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207