Later Life Disability Status following Incarceration as a Prisoner of War
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Incarceration-related predictors of later life disability in former prisoners of war (POWs) have not been previously described. The objective of this project was to identify aspects of POW incarceration which are associated with later life disability status. METHODS: Cross-sectional retrospective study of 328 former U.S. military personnel held as POWs (World War II and Korean and Vietnam Wars) who presented for evaluations at a Veterans Affairs medical center between January 1, 1997 and December 31, 2004 outcome measures were: (1) total number of later life disability conditions attributable to incarceration and (2) cumulative percentage later life disability attributable to these conditions. RESULTS: We found significant associations between later life disability and POW experiences, including experiencing or witnessing torture, solitary confinement, forced marches, dysentry, pellagra, vitamin deficiencies, scabies, depression, and suicidal thoughts. CONCLUSIONS: Conditions of captivity and health concerns or emotional distress during captivity may contribute to long-term adverse health outcomes as measured by later life disabilities in individuals incarcerated as POWs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".