Care and functional disabilities in daily activities – ELSI-Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence of demand and provision of care for the Brazilian population with functional disabilities in activities of daily living. METHODS: This is a quantitative and descriptive study using baseline data from ELSI-Brazil (Brazilian Longitudinal Study of Aging), a cohort study with a representative sample of the Brazilian population aged 50 years or older (n = 9,412). We considered the demand for care from the self-report of having some difficulty to perform at least one activity of daily life (eating, bathing, going to the toilet, dressing, moving in a room [ambulation], and transferring from chair [transfer]). Care supply was measured by having some help to perform the activity of daily living. RESULTS: Approximately a quarter of the individuals evaluated (23.2%) reported difficulty in at least one activity of daily living, especially regarding transfer and dressing. Age, schooling, and number of chronic diseases were significantly associated with the difficulty in activities of daily living. Among those who reported difficulty, 35.1% received help of others and 11.8% did not receive (lack of care). The activities with greater lack of care were bathing (13.3%) and transfer (11.7%), which reveals an undignified survival condition. Care remains a family (94.1%) and female (72.1%) issue; despite the important changes that have taken place in society, there is still a lack of care policies. Of the total caregivers, 25.8% reported stopping working or studying to perform this role and only 9.2% were paid (hired ones or family members). CONCLUSIONS: The ELSI-Brazil results reveal the expressive care demand of the Brazilian population aged 50 years or older with functional disabilities on activities of daily living and the lack of care policies aimed at this public.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".