The relationship between handedness and health among a senior population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many theories surround the origin of handedness, but the prevailing theory suggests it occurs as a result of exposure to elevated hormone levels in the prenatal environment (Geschwind & Galaburda, 1985), which would result in a relationship between handedness and health conditions; however the majority of studies that have assessed this relationship have focused on university aged or young adult participants. To assess if left-handers have a higher incidence of health conditions later in life, it is essential to use seniors as a target population. In the current study, a convenience sample of seniors from Southern Ontario (n=497), aged 65 and older completed the Waterloo Handedness Questionnaire and a background questionnaire, which included items pertaining to sociodemographic status and medical history. Chi-square analysis revealed that left-handers and inconsistent handers had a higher incidence of certain health conditions. When assessed individually, the following physical health conditions reached significance: fibromyalgia, migraines, deafness, drug allergies, hay fever, psoriasis, cancer, headaches, arthritis, attention deficit disorder, learning disabilities and reading difficulties. Additionally, when males and females were assessed separately, certain conditions that were not associated overall reached significance with separate analyses by gender. Male participants reported more health conditions and were linked with fibromyalgia, migraines, deafness, drug allergies, psoriasis, hay fever, cancer and reading difficulties whereas females were linked with fibromyalgia, migraines, headaches, ADD and learning disabilities. The results will be discussed in light of the Geschwind & Galaburda (1985) theory.Acknowledgments: NSERC
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".