Childhood socioeconomic circumstances and disability trajectories in older men and women: a European cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: We observed a lack of population-based longitudinal research examining the association of disadvantaged childhood socioeconomic circumstances (CSC) and disability [activities of daily living (ADL) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADL)] in older age, and whether socioeconomic attainments in adulthood can compensate for a poor socioeconomic start in life. Methods: Data on 24 440 persons aged 50-96 in 14 European countries (Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe) were used to measure the associations between CSC and limitations with ADL and with IADL, using mixed-effects logistic regression models. Models stratified by gender were adjusted for education during young adulthood, main occupation during middle age, ability to make ends meet during old age and potential confounding and control variables. Results: Risks of ADL and IADL limitations increased with age and were different between women and men. For women, a gradient across CSC strata was observed, showing that the more disadvantaged the CSC, the higher the risk of ADL and IADL limitations in old age, even after adjustment for adult socioeconomic indicators. For men, the association between CSC and disability was mediated by the main occupation in middle age and the ability to make ends meet at older age. Conclusion: Women who grew up in socioeconomically disadvantaged households were at higher risk of disability in older age and this disadvantage was not attenuated by favourable adult socioeconomic conditions. Men were more likely to make up for a disadvantaged start in adulthood.
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 | 0.039 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".