MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2121900829 · doi:10.5539/ass.v10n2p118

Social Capital and Mental Health: Results from a Cross-Sectional Study in Bangladesh

2013· article· en· W2121900829 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Md. Shahidul Islam, Muhammad Shafiul Alam

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthSocial capitalPsychologyGeneral Health QuestionnaireBivariate analysisCross-sectional studyTest (biology)Logistic regressionNorm of reciprocityAssociation (psychology)Reciprocity (cultural anthropology)Social determinants of healthGerontologySocial psychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryPublic healthSociologyMedicineSocial scienceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the relationship between social capital and mental health of the aging people in Bangladesh. A cross-sectional study was conducted in Madhabdi municipality and data were collected through face to face interview among the aging people. Mental health was measured by using General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). Bivariate analysis such as cross tabulation was applied to presentation of the data and chi-square test was applied to test the association between social capital dimensions and mental health. The chi-square test showed that all dimensions of social capital were related to mental health. Binary logistic regression model was applied to measure the effects of social capital on mental health. The results showed that the aging people who had low neighborhood cohesion ,low social networks ,low norms of reciprocity and low social trust were 1.967 (0.999-3.874), 1.909 (1.015-3.587), 2.302 (1.288-4.113) and 1.705 (.928-3.132) times more likely to say that they have poor mental health status. So, this study reveals that social capital was associated with mental health of the aging people in Bangladesh.

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)0.001
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.349 · 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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social Science→Same topicHealth disparities and outcomes→French-language works237,207→