Quality of life of older adults in rural southern Brazil
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
INTRODUCTION: Ageing in rural communities poses unique challenges that can have an impact on older adults' quality of life (QoL). These limitations can be costly to the healthcare system but there is potential for them to be addressed with a better understanding of factors that affect QoL. The goal of this study was to assess the perceptions of QoL of older adults living in rural areas of southern Brazil and to identify factors associated with QoL in this population. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 197 older adults (mean age 69.7±7.5 years). Instruments included the Katz and Lawton activities of daily living scales, QoL instruments and a questionnaire that addressed social, economic, demographic and health variables. Multiple regression analysis was performed, using various domains and overall QoL as dependent variables. RESULTS: Older adults who were more independent, living with a spouse, with higher income and educational levels, fewer morbidities, fewer years of tobacco use, and who did not report falls in the last year were significantly more likely to rate their QoL higher on one or more domains/measures. CONCLUSIONS: Factors associated with QoL of older adults in rural areas are similar to those found in studies conducted in urban areas, but the rural context may influence these variables in unique ways.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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