Associations among socioeconomic status, perceived neighborhood control, perceived individual control, and self‐reported health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recent research has suggested that perceived control and a person's perceptions of their neighborhood environment may mediate the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and health. This cross‐sectional study assessed whether perceptions of informal social control mediated the association between SES and self‐reported health, and if these two constructs represented distinct mechanisms linking SES with self‐reported health. The sample consisted of 869 adults residing in 300 census tracts in Montreal, Canada. Multilevel methods were used to assess the associations among self‐reported health, SES, perceived control, and perceived informal social control adjusting for sociodemographic variables. Perceived control (mediation estimate=−0.16, p<.001) and perceived informal social control (mediation estimate=−0.05, p<.05) partially mediated the association between SES and self‐reported health. Perceived control did not mediate the association of perceived informal social control with self‐reported health. Perceived informal social control may act alongside but distinct from perceived control as a mechanism linking SES to self‐reported health. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".