A National Profile of Caregivers for the Oldest-Old
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limited research has examined caregivers for the oldest old (85+), a distinct group among older adults who are most likely to experience functional and cognitive limitations that require care. To profile socio-demographic characteristics of the oldest-old and their informal caregivers and assess their caregiving situations, we used data from 3163 care recipients with at least one functional limitation from the 2004 National Long-Term Care Survey and 1363 caregivers who were either adult children or spouses of care recipients. The oldestold with functional disabilities were less likely to be married and more likely to be women living alone. Compared with those under 85, the oldestold group were likely to have more extensive IADL and ADL limitations. However, with the exception of dementia, the oldest-old had a lower prevalence of chronic illness than younger elders. The oldest-old care recipients also tended to use more formal care service. While caregivers for the oldest old were less likely to be a sole caregiver and more likely to use formal care service, their physical and emotional stress from caregiving remained the same with their counterpart group of caregivers. Comparison of caregivers by their relationships to care recipients also indicated that adult children who cared for the oldest-old parents tended to express the most stress from caregiving. We contend that formal services need to be better incorporated with informal caregiving to attenuate negative caregiver outcomes, especially for the oldest-old whose informal caregiving network is rather limited.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".