Religiosity Dimensions and Disability-Free Life Expectancy in Taiwan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Eight years of panel data are used to investigate the association between three dimensions of religiosity and total and disability-free life expectancy (TLE/DFLE) in Taiwan. Method: Data come from the 1999 “Taiwan Longitudinal Study on Aging” (TLSA; N = 4,440; Age 55+). Dimensions of religiosity are public, private, belief, and coping. Mortality is linked to a national database. Disability is activities of daily living (ADLs). TLE/DFLE estimates use the Stochastic Population Analysis for Complex Events (SPACE) software. Results: Those who engage in public and private religiosity live longer and more years disability-free than others, but proportion of life disability-free does not differ across levels of religiosity. Coping is less associated with TLE and DFLE. Coping however associates with more years disabled among men. Findings are robust to model specifications. Discussion: The way in which religiosity associates with health depends upon the definition. When it does associate, religiosity increases TLE and DFLE proportionately.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".