Living Arrangement and Life Satisfaction in Older Malaysians: The Mediating Role of Social Support Function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This cross-sectional and correlational survey examines the association between different types of living arrangements and life satisfaction in older Malaysians, while taking into account the mediating effects of social support function. METHODOLOGY AND FINDINGS: A total of 1880 of older adults were selected by multistage stratified sampling. Life satisfaction and social support were measured with the Philadelphia Geriatric Center Morale Scale and Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey. The result shows living with children as the commonest type of living arrangement for older adults in peninsular Malaysia. Compared to living alone, living only with a spouse especially and then co-residency with children were both associated with better life satisfaction (p<.01) and social support function (p<.01). The mediating effect of social support function enhanced the relation between living arrangements and life satisfaction. CONCLUSION: This study revealed that types of living arrangement directly, and indirectly through social support function, play an important role in predicting life satisfaction for older adults in Malaysia. This study makes remarkable contributions to the Convoy model in older Malaysians.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".