MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130654903 · doi:10.1017/s0714980800000647

Health, Psycho-social and Cultural Determinants of Medication Use by Chinese-Canadian Older Persons

2002· article· en· W2130654903 on OpenAlexaffabout
Erin Y. Tjam, John P. Hirdes

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHealth careGerontologyMedical prescriptionEthnic groupFamily medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Variations in health and medication use exist across cultures. Medication use among Chinese-Canadian older persons is complicated by many factors including combined use of Western and traditional Chinese medicines (TCM). There is little research on health, psycho-social and cultural determinants of medication use in the Chinese. A cross-sectional census study of community-based Chinese-Canadian older persons in the Kitchener/Waterloo area was conducted using the Minimum Data Set for Home Care and a supplementary questionnaire for cultural issues. The response rate was 89.1 per cent with 106 participants using face-to-face assessments. Socio-demographic and cultural variables were summarized. The multivariate logistic model for TCM use included pain symptoms and being hospitalized, and a curvilinear association between TCM use and health beliefs. For combined medicine use, living with a child, pain symptoms, hospitalization, and social isolation problems were the main effects. Living with a child, physical health problems and number of diseases were associated with Western medicine use. Health, psycho-social and cultural factors were significant determinants for medication use. Education programs for both Chinese-Canadian older persons and health care providers are necessary to understand the appropriate use of Western and TCM treatments.

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations11
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissementSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207