Gender differences in mobility disability during young, middle and older age in West African adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to assess the prevalence and the contribution of socio-demographic factors and chronic diseases to mobility disability in West African countries. Data were obtained from the World Health Survey (2002-2003) in which adults≥18 years participated, from Burkina Faso (n=4822), Mali (n=4230) and Senegal (n=3197). Participants reporting mild, moderate, severe, extreme difficulty or inability to move around were defined as having mobility disability. All estimates were corrected for sampling design. Association measures were estimated using logistic regression methods. Mobility disability was frequent at young ages (35-44 years old) in men and women, respectively: 17% and 23% in Burkina Faso, 12% and 23% in Mali and 22% and 34% in Senegal. Women had higher odds of mobility difficulty than men at every age group in the three countries: 1.34 (95%CI 1.06; 1.70) in Burkina Faso; 2.33 (95% CI 1.84; 2.71) in Mali and 1.82 (95%CI 1.41; 2.36) in Senegal. Controlling for socio-economic factors and chronic disease, these odds changed respectively to 0.94 (95%CI 0.70; 1.25), 2.19 (95%CI 1.61; 2.96) and 1.90 (95%CI 1.27; 2.84). These results constitute a benchmark for the study of trends of mobility disability in West Africa and could be used by policy planners.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".