MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993379553 · doi:10.3109/13685538.2011.626819

Effect of age, education and health status on community dwelling older men’s health concerns

2011· article· en· W1993379553 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Cara Tannenbaum

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Aging Male · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Roles and Identity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineGerontologyDepression (economics)AnxietyErectile dysfunctionEducational attainmentMental healthHealth literacyHealth carePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: A significant gap in evidence characterizes the process of establishing patient-centered health priorities for older men. METHODS: A cross-sectional postal survey of 2325 Canadian community dwelling men aged 55-97 years old was conducted in 2008 to gauge older men's level of concern for 24 different health items, to determine the impact of age, education and health status on these perceptions, and to ascertain whether men perceive that their health concerns are being attended to. RESULTS: Health issues of greatest concern to men were mobility impairment (64% of respondents), memory loss (64%), and medication side effects (63%). Respondents with lower educational attainment expressed greater concern about their health and were almost 2-fold times more likely to report being concerned about stroke, heart disease and prostate disorders in analyses that controlled for age and health status. Physical and mental health were independently associated with various concerns about health, but old age was not a reliable predictor, with only younger men (<75 years old) differentially preoccupied by conditions such as erectile dysfunction. Health items of greatest concern to men tended to be those with the lowest screening or counseling rates: these included incontinence, osteoporosis, mobility impairment, falls, anxiety issues, memory loss and depression. CONCLUSION: An improved consumer-guided agenda for addressing older men's health in the coming decade is urgently required.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.226
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations17
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Aging MaleSame topicGender Roles and Identity StudiesFrench-language works237,207