A Cross-Sectional Study of Self-Rated Health among Older Adults: Association with Drinking Profiles and Other Determinants of Health
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compares the relationship between drinking profiles and self-rated health with and without adjusting for other determinants of health among a sample of older adults from the general population. Respondents were 1,494 men and 2,176 women aged between 55 and 74 from the GENACIS Canadian survey. The dependent variable was self-rated health, an individual's perception of his or her own general health, a measure used as a proxy for health status. The independent variables were drinking profiles (types of drinkers and nondrinkers) as well as other demographic, psychosocial, and health-related variables (control variables). After adjustment for other determinants of health, regression analyses showed that (1) frequent/moderate drinkers were more likely to have a better self-rated health compared with nondrinkers (lifetime abstainers and former drinkers) and (2) self-rated health did not differ significantly between frequent/moderate drinkers and other types of drinkers (frequent/nonmoderate and infrequent drinkers). Our results suggest that drinking is related to a better self-rated health compared with nondrinking regardless of the drinking profile. Drinking and healthy lifestyle guidelines specific to older adults should be studied, discussed, and integrated into public health practices.
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.
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 | 0.005 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 it