MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900030146 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igy023.1224

EFFECT OF CHILDHOOD ADVERSITY ON PSYCHOLOGICAL AND BIOLOGICAL MARKERS OF STRESS IN MIDDLE AND LATER LIFE

2018· article· en· W2900030146 on OpenAlexaff
Jooyoung Kong, David M. Almeida, Markus H. Schafer

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLife course approachPsychologyNeglectDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyPerspective (graphical)Socioeconomic statusEarly childhoodDiseaseMedicinePsychiatryPopulationEnvironmental healthPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A growing number of studies have identified significant linkages between adverse childhood experiences and health outcomes in later life. Guided by a broad theoretical framework of the life course perspective, these studies have postulated that childhood adversities are the seedbed for vulnerabilities that may accumulate across the life course. This symposium includes four presentations that build on such existing knowledge, and its primary aim is to investigate the effects of early childhood adversities on psychological and biological markers of stress in middle and later adulthood. Using nationally representative samples, the four presentations focus on examining various aspects of psychological and biological markers of stress in later adulthood, including biomarkers of inflammation, alpha amylase, grip strength, and daily emotional reactivity. Particularly, biomarker data such as inflammation have key strengths: providing objective data about health and functioning in contrast to measurements based on self-reports and indicating potential risk of future disease. This symposium also addresses a wide range of childhood adversities, including neglect and abuse, low socioeconomic status, and early parental loss and provides insights around how different types and characteristics of adverse childhood experiences may unfold differently across the life course. Additionally, this symposium consists of a group of multidisciplinary presenters with diverse scholarly and cultural backgrounds. For example, one of the presentations discusses the experience of older Korean adults and offers a chance to understand cross-cultural differences.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207