MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014967978 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v2n1p8

Modeling the Effects of Macro-Measures on Elder Health in China: A “Fresh Sample” Approach

2010· article· en· W2014967978 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Linda Eberst Dorsten, Yuhui Li

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on AgingPeking University
KeywordsMacroCensoring (clinical trials)ChinaLongitudinal studyInequalitySample (material)GerontologyMacro levelSurvey data collectionLongitudinal dataEnvironmental healthPsychologyDemographyGeographyMedicineSociologyEconomicsStatisticsEconometricsComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One part of the analysis presented in this paper examines how elder health is affected by macro-measures ofregional inequality and socio-environmental conditions. Unique data from Chinese Longitudinal HealthyLongevity Survey (CLHLS) provide demographic, socio-economic and health information about China elders,including oldest-old (ages 80–105). To examine the effects of macro-level variables on elder self-rated health,we use data from the 1998 wave (baseline), and add macro-level indicators of environmental conditions, SES,and demographic characteristics not in the CLHLS. However, censoring due to deaths and dropouts is very highin longitudinal datasets of the elderly including the CLHLS, and samples can vary by data wave. Therefore, asecond part of our analysis includes only new respondents added in the 2000 wave -- a “fresh sample” for avalidation test of our model.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.164

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.396 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207