Subjective perception of health in elderly inpatients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is evidence that subjective health is an important variable in general health outcomes. It can be an indicator of the individual's overall health status, creating a reliable and valid estimate about health. Quality of life (QoL) assessment can be associated with the individuals' subjective assessment of their own health status. The aim of the present study was to investigate variables associated with subjective perception of health in older inpatients. Ninety elderly inpatients over 60 years old were interviewed. The perception of health assessment (healthy/unhealthy) allocated elders in either of two groups. All the elders answered sociodemographic questions, the WHOQOL-100 and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). Comparing the group that considered themselves unhealthy to the other group, the former showed a tendency of worse QoL assessments in five out of six domains investigated. Significant differences were found for the physical and level of independence domains, as well as overall QoL. There was a significant association between health perception and lower intensity of depressive symptoms, as well as better QoL perception in the level of independence domain. This study shows the existence of an association between depressive symptoms and health assessment. It also suggests that the independence dimension is important in the elders' perception of their health status. These findings can help identify cause-effect relations between variables in aging studies involving health indicators and bring new intervention proposals for the elderly.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".