Life course influences on quality of life at age 50 years: evidence from the National Child Development Study (1958 British birth cohort study)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this study were to investigate whether prospective data reveal life course influences on quality of life at older ages; to establish a baseline for the evolution of quality of life through the Third Age; and to estimate the relative importance of direct and indirect effects in these life course relationships. We used the age 50 years sweep of the National Child Development Study (1958 British birth cohort study) that included the CASP measure of positive quality of life at older ages, allowing prospective path analysis of life course influences on quality of life at the start of the Third Age. We found that material (social class; deprivation) and psycho-social (family conflict; family fracture) circumstances in childhood and adulthood were linked using path analysis to CASP scores at age 50 years. The strength of these relationships was modest; and their influence was primarily indirect via well-recognised contemporaneous factors. Prospective data revealed life course influences on quality of life at the start of the Third Age. We conclude that the influence of these longitudinal factors is weak in comparison with that of contemporaneous circumstances. In this respect quality of life differs from health.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".