Longest held occupation in a lifetime and risk of disability in activities of daily living
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To examine the association between the longest held occupation in a lifetime and risk of disability in activities of daily living (ADL) among elderly people (65 years and older) in northern Taiwan. METHODS: A case-control design was used nested within two cohorts of a total of 2198 elderly people who had been followed up either between 1993 and 1997 or between 1996 and 1997. Cases were 360 elderly people with ADL disability within the study period. For each case, two sex matched controls were randomly sampled from the pool of elderly people free from ADL disability. Occupational data were collected through interviews conducted in 1997. Performed job contents were classified into occupational categories and occupation based social classes. Unconditional logistic regression techniques were used to estimate relative risk and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) of ADL disability. RESULTS: Compared with people who were former legislators, government administrators, or business executives and managers, workers in agriculture, animal husbandry, forestry, or fishing (odds ratio (OR) 1.9, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.5) and workers in craft and related trades (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.4) had significantly increased risks of subsequent ADL disability. Differential risks of ADL disability were found across social classes, with a significant dose-response trend in which unskilled blue collar workers had an 1.8 times higher risk of ADL disability than higher social classes of white collar workers. CONCLUSIONS: After adjustment for education, there was still an inverse relation between risk of ADL disability and social class. Although total control for all the known risk factors for ADL disability among elderly people was impossible, the results tend to suggest a potential for an effect of longest held occupation in a lifetime on risk of ADL disability.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".