MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Factors associated with quality of life of Brazilian older adults

2009· article· en· W1993047590 on OpenAlex
Lisiane Manganelli Girardi Paskulin, Lucila Amaral Carneiro Vianna, Anita Molzahn

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Nursing Review · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Nursing, Elderly Care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality of life (healthcare)GerontologyPsychological interventionMedicineActivities of daily livingCross-sectional studyScale (ratio)PsychologyPhysical therapyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to explore factors associated with quality of life (QoL) of Brazilian community-dwelling older adults. METHODS: This was a descriptive exploratory cross-sectional study. Data were collected through a household survey. A random sample of 288 older adults from Porto Alegre, Brazil participated in the study. A demographic and health data sheet, the OARS activities of daily living (ADL) scale and the WHOQOL-BREF were administered. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The mean age of participants was 71.2 years (SD = 7.5) and 67.4% were female. Using multiple linear regression analysis, with overall QoL as the dependent variable, perceived health status, education level, engagement in physical activity, medical conditions, age group and use of primary health care were significant associated factors. With physical QoL as the dependent variable, significant factors included: perceived health status, medical conditions, education, physical activities and dependence in ADL; with social QoL as the dependent variable, only age group and paid work were significant. In relation to environmental QoL, education and perceived health were significant factors. CONCLUSIONS: The results illustrate the complexity of factors influencing QoL. With a better understanding of these factors, it is possible to plan appropriate health interventions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.368
Threshold uncertainty score0.646

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.369 · 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