MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2987860394 · doi:10.14349/rlp.2019.v51.n2.8

Nivel educativo y la autonomía funcional en adultos que residen en Quito (Ecuador)

2019· article· es· W2987860394 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lila Adana Díaz, Alejandra Cuadros-López, Dilan Andrango-Guerrón, Alberto Rodríguez‐Lorenzana, Clara Loureiro

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Latinoamericana de Psicología · 2019
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicAging, Health, and Disability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The functional disability of the adult associated with population aging generates a public health problem due to the impact on the health and social care systems. The objective of this investigation was to study the association between educational level and functional autonomy of adults of the Metropolitan District of Quito (DMQ) in Ecuador. For this, a secondary analysis was done with the information from the database of the study “Montreal cognitive assesment (MOCA): normative data for the Ecuadorian population”, the same one that has a cross-sectional study design with adults from 45 to 85 years old. A multivariate logistic regression model was used. The sample number was 328 participants of which 301 were included. The results show the significant differences in terms of educational level and functional autonomy, being a factor of prevention an educational level equal to or greater than 12 years of instruction. In addition, showing greater possibility of loss of autonomy based on age. This existing association between educational level and the preservation of functional autonomy in adults in the DMQ demonstrates the importance of promoting access to permanent educational practices in the population as part of a program to prevent the loss of functional autonomy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Latinoamericana de PsicologíaSame topicAging, Health, and DisabilityFrench-language works237,207