Socioeconomic Status and Health among Older Adults in Rural and Urban China
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The association between socioeconomic status (SES) and health, which has proven to be quite robust, is rarely tested in societies where levels of economic development and systems of stratification differ from those in Western developed countries. This article examines associations in rural and urban China. METHOD: Techniques include logit equation estimates of separate and pooled samples. The latter employ interaction terms to test rural and urban effects. Socioeconomic indicators include those more customarily used in these types of studies (e.g., education) and several that are less traditional (e.g., pension eligibility). RESULTS: Results indicate associations exist in China. Bank savings is the strongest predictor. Some unexpected results are also found, including a positive association between socioeconomic status and chronic conditions (e.g., cardiovascular disease) among older adults in urban China. DISCUSSION: Use and access to a health care professional might explain part of this anomaly.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it