Living at home or in an institution: what makes the difference for seniors?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This article examines some of the health and socio-demographic factors associated with living in long-term health care facilities rather than in private households, for elderly people with various levels of disability. DATA SOURCE: The data are from the 1996/97 National Population Health Survey conducted by Statistics Canada. Data from a sample of 1,711 people aged 65 or older living in long-term health care facilities and 13,363 in private households were weighted to represent about 185,100 and 3.4 million seniors, respectively. ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES: Descriptive data were produced using bivariate frequencies. Multiple logistic regression models were used to examine associations between living in long-term health care facilities and selected health and socio-demographic characteristics for seniors with self-reported severe, moderate or no disability. MAIN RESULTS: While health status was strongly associated with residence in a long-term health care facility, the absence of a spouse, low income, low education, and advanced age were also significant.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".