Older women's health priorities and perceptions of care delivery: results of the WOW health survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As women get older, their health priorities change. We surveyed a sample of older Canadian women to investigate what health priorities are of concern to them, their perceptions about the care delivered to address these priorities and the extent to which priorities and perceptions of care differ across age groups and provinces. METHODS: The WOW (What Older women Want) cross-sectional health survey was mailed in October 2003 to 5000 community-dwelling women aged 55-95 years from 10 Canadian provinces. Women were asked questions on 26 health priorities according to the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, and their perceptions of whether these priorities were being addressed by health care providers through screening or counselling. Differences in priorities and perceptions of care delivery were examined across age groups and provinces. RESULTS: The response rate was 52%. The mean age of the respondents was 71 (standard deviation 7) years. The health priorities identified most frequently by the respondents were preventing memory loss (88% of the respondents), learning about the side effects of medications (88%) and correcting vision impairment (86%). Items least frequently selected were counselling about community programs (28%), counselling about exercise (33%) and pneumonia vaccination (33%). Up to 97% of the women recalled being adequately screened for heart disease and stroke risk factors, but as little as 11% reported receiving counselling regarding concerns about memory loss or end-of-life issues. Women who stated that specific priorities were of great concern or importance to them were more than twice as likely as those who stated that they were not of great concern or importance to perceive that these priorities were being addressed: osteoporosis (odds ratio [OR] 2.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.1- 3.2), end-of-life care (OR 2.6, 95% CI 2.0-3.4), anxiety reduction (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.8-2.6), fall prevention (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.6-2.7), stroke (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.4-3.0), depression (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.7-2.7) and urinary incontinence (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.7-2.5). The respondents' perceptions of care delivery varied across age groups and provinces. INTERPRETATION: According to the perceptions of surveyed women, health care providers are addressing many, but not all, of their health concerns, especially those that are of great concern or importance to these women.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".