MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2401104060

Marital breakdown and subsequent depression.

2007· article· en· W2401104060 on OpenAlexaff
Michelle Rotermann

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Dynamics and Relationships
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpouseDepression (economics)Marital statusDemographyConfoundingOddsLogistic regressionPopulationPsychologyPoolingAssociation (psychology)Odds ratioMedicineEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This study examines the relationship between the dissolution of a marital or cohabitating relationship and subsequent depression among Canadians aged 20 to 64. DATA SOURCES: Data are from the longitudinal component of the National Population Health Survey (1994/1995 through 2004/2005) and include the household population only. ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES: Cross-tabulations were used to examine the association of marital dissolution with change in household income, social support, presence and number of children in the household and employment status over a two-year period. Multiple logistic regression was used to examine associations between marital dissolution and depression over a two-year period among those who had not been depressed two years earlier, while controlling for these changes. To maximize sample size, pooling of repeated observations was used. MAIN RESULTS: For both sexes, dissolution of a marriage or co-habiting relationship was associated with higher odds of a new episode of depression, compared with those who remained with a spouse over the two-year period. When the influences of possible confounders were considered, the association between a break-up and depression was weakened, but persisted. Marital dissolution was more strongly associated with depression among men than among women.

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)0.003
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 score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations76
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsFrench-language works237,207