MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2775882875 · doi:10.1177/0898264317713135

Mental Health and Spouse Support Among Older Couples Living With Sensory Loss

2017· article· en· W2775882875 on OpenAlexaff
Christine M. Lehane, Sofia Maria Hofsöe, Walter Wittich, Jesper Dammeyer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aging and Health · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersVelux Fonden
KeywordsSpouseMental healthSensory lossHearing lossSensory systemAnxietyPsychologySocial supportClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatryAudiologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The current study examined the mental health of couples living with and without sensory loss; compared the mental health of couples living with hearing, vision, or dual-sensory loss; and investigated the association between spouse support and the mental health of couples living with sensory loss. METHOD: The study included 513 couples with sensory loss and 1,079 couples without sensory loss. Actor-Partner Interdependence Models were used to examine associations between spouse support and mental health. RESULTS: Controlling for potential covariates, individuals with sensory loss and their spouses were at a greater risk of mental health problems. Sensory loss modality (hearing and/or vision) did not explain any differences. Both actor and partner effects of spouse support on anxiety and depression were found. DISCUSSION: The findings highlight the need to support the mental health of couples living with sensory loss and indicate the importance of considering the intimate relationship in future studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.725

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations31
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aging and HealthSame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207