MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2312633948 · doi:10.4057/jsr.55.434

Social Networks and Mental Health among the Old-Old Living in Metropolitan Areas

2005· article· en· W2312633948 on OpenAlexaff
Ken Harada, Hidehiro Sugisawa, Tatsuto Asakawa, Tami Saito

Bibliographic record

VenueJapanese Sociological Review · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Aging
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpouseMental healthMetropolitan areaLife satisfactionDistressPsychologyGerontologySocial supportDepression (economics)Psychological distressScale (ratio)DemographyMedicinePsychiatryClinical psychologyGeographySocial psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the effects of social networks on mental health among the old-old living in metropolitan areas. Data were obtained from a survey of 618 community dwellers aged 75 and over living in the Sumida ward in Tokyo. Mental health was measured by distress (Geriatric Depression Scale Short Form; GDS-SF) and life satisfaction.The findings are as follows : 1. Having a spouse was associated with lower levels of distress and higher levels of life satisfaction for men, but not for women.2. Presence of children was associated with lower levels of distress and higher levels of life satisfaction for women, but not for men.3. Greater numbers of local friends increased life satisfaction for men, and greater numbers of middle-distance or distant kin decreased distress and increased life satisfaction for women. The results suggested that embeddedness in traditional local kin networks was not necessarily associated with better mental health.4. Greater level of participation in local community groups decreased distress and increased life satisfaction for women. The results suggested that local community groups were effective resources to adjust to stressful situations in old-old age.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.341 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJapanese Sociological Review→Same topicHealth disparities and outcomes→French-language works237,207→