MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2205236793 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v8n8p41

Life Satisfaction Index among Elderly People Residing in Gorgan and Its Correlation with Certain Demographic Factors in 2013

2015· article· en· W2205236793 on OpenAlex
Maryam Chehregosha, Amir Bastaminia, Fatemeh Vahidian, Azam Mohammadi, Aliakbar Aghaeinejad, Ensiyeh Jamshidi, Afsaneh Ghasemi

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGolestan University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsLife satisfactionZestCorrelationPsychologyDemographyGerontologyMedicineSocial psychologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p><strong>BACKGROUND:</strong> Aging is a universal phenomenon that will present itself as a dominant social and welfare challenge.</p><p><strong>AIM: </strong>This study was to examine life satisfaction among people residing in Gorgan and its correlation with certain demographic factors in 2013.<strong></strong></p><p><strong>METHODS:</strong> A total of 250 elder people were selected for the study through the convenience sampling during 4 months. Data collected through life satisfaction index-A (LSIA). This instrument consists of 5 subscales, including, zest for life, resolution and fortitude, congruence between desired and achieved goals, positive self-concept and mood tone. The Multiple Linear Regression analysis was used in order to determine factors influencing the overall LSIA.</p><p><strong>RESULTS:</strong> The overall LSIA score was 22.1 ± 7.5 with the maximum and minimum mean scores pertaining to the resolution and fortitude (6.1 ± 2.5) and the positive self-concept (3.1 ± 1.2) subscales, respectively. Level of education, type of living and gender were variables influencing the overall LSIA (P<0.05).</p><p><strong>CONCLUSION:</strong> Given the overall LSIA, it appears that future plans for this age group should be seriously revised along with cultural plans for promoting reverence for old age in the general public.</p>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.309 · 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