DEPRESSION, SEX, AND GENDER ROLES IN AN OLDER BRAZILIAN POPULATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Methods: Cross-sectional survey of a population of adults 65 years and older (n=256) in Natal (northeast of Brazil). Depression was defined in the Center for Epidemiologic Symptoms Depression Scale (CES-D ≥ 16). We used a 12 items validated version of the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) to classify participants in four gender roles (Masculine, Feminine, Androgynous and Undifferentiated). Poisson regressions were fitted to estimate the prevalence ratios (PR) of depression for each gender role compared with the masculine role, and adjusting for sex, age, sufficiency of income, self-rated health and chronic conditions. Results: Almost all participants (n=237, 93%) were able to answer the questions in spite of low literacy. Gender roles were not associated with sex. 50% were classified as masculine, 19% as feminine, 32% as androgynous and 27% as undifferentiated. Depression prevalence was high (39.7%). Gender roles remained associated with depression prevalence after adjustment for covariates. Those endorsing the feminine role had a depression prevalence ratio (PR) of 2.2 (95% CI: 1.2–4.1) times higher relative to those endorsing the masculine role. Corresponding figures for those undifferentiated were 1.9 (95% CI: 1.0–3.5). Those endorsing androgyny were not different from masculinity PR=1.4 (95% CI: 0.75–2.7). Conclusions: Gender roles were associated with depression, independently from being a man or a woman, suggesting that certain aspects of gender as reinforced by society may contribute to the social production of depression.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".