MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085516535 · doi:10.1177/0898264305279778

Use of Annual Physical Examinations by Aging Chinese Canadians

2005· article· en· W2085516535 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daniel W. L. Lai, Sonya Kalyniak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aging and Health · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGerontologyPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This study identified predictors of use of annual physical examination by aging Chinese Canadians. METHODS: Data were collected from a random sample of 2,272 Chinese Canadians aged 55 and older. Based on the Andersen-Newman service utilization framework, hierarchical logistic regression analysis was used to examine the predictors of annual physical examination use. RESULTS: Predicting factors of annual physical health examination use were marital status, gender, length of residency in Canada, Chinese ethnic identity, social support, number of illnesses, dependency in instrumental activities of daily living (IADL), and depressive symptoms. DISCUSSION: Findings showed importance in targeting identified groups for preventive health education. Strengthened ethnic identity may serve to enhance one's social support network, which in turn facilitates the use of annual physical examinations. There may be awareness within the Chinese cultural network that builds education and attentiveness to preventive health care. The misconceptions about annual physical examinations were also discussed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations41
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aging and HealthSame topicHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular PreventionFrench-language works237,207