MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138875008 · doi:10.5539/ass.v8n15p147

Financial and Social Capitals of Elderly People in Thailand

2012· article· en· W2138875008 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amornrat Apinunmahakul

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRespondentMental healthAsset (computer security)Population ageingWelfareGerontologySocial WelfareDemographic economicsSocial policyPopulationPsychologyEconomicsSociologyPolitical scienceDemographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The number of ageing population in Thailand has been increased rapidly. The country was ranked as the most aged economy in South-east Asia after Singapore. However, there exists a body of research that associates social connectedness with good health. It hence is the objective of this study to examine of whether the correlation holds for Thai elderly. Using the first round pilot survey on Health, Ageing and Retirement in Thailand (HART), the study found that being married and, the level of education of the respondent contribute positively significantly to the probability of reporting good physical and mental health. The more the elderly participate in social activities, the higher the probability of reporting good or very good health, in particular, the mental health. Social participations to good physical health is an income equivalence of a 5 percent increase in an individual non-labor income, whilst social participations to good mental health accounts to almost 14 percent increase in the total asset value. Participating in voluntary associations thus reduces heath inequalities among older people. The research findings hence advocate for the social involvement of elderly people as a part of the quality ageing policy and the community-based welfare policy.

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)0.000
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207