MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047757997 · doi:10.1007/s13524-012-0096-x

Widowhood and Mortality: A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression

2012· review· en· W2047757997 on OpenAlexaff
Eran Shor, David J. Roelfs, Misty Curreli, Lynn Clemow, Matthew M. Burg, Joseph E. Schwartz

Bibliographic record

VenueDemography · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsDemographyConfidence intervalMeta-analysisHazard ratioCovariateMedicineRegression analysisMeta-regressionProportional hazards modelGerontologyStatisticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study of spousal bereavement and mortality has long been a major topic of interest for social scientists, but much remains unknown with respect to important moderating factors, such as age, follow-up duration, and geographic region. The present study examines these factors using meta-analysis. Keyword searches were conducted in multiple electronic databases, supplemented by extensive iterative hand searches. We extracted 1,377 mortality risk estimates from 123 publications, providing data on more than 500 million persons. Compared with married people, widowers had a mean hazard ratio (HR) of 1.23 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.19-1.28) among HRs adjusted for age and additional covariates and a high subjective quality score. The mean HR was higher for men (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.19-1.35) than for women (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.08-1.22). A significant interaction effect was found between gender and mean age, with HRs decreasing more rapidly for men than for women as age increased. Other significant predictors of HR magnitude included sample size, geographic region, level of statistical adjustment, and study quality.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.042
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.252
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations214
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDemographySame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207