MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014210426 · doi:10.1002/gps.5302

Household debt, hypertension and depressive symptoms for older adults

2020· article· en· W3014210426 on OpenAlexaff
Hongxun Song, Ruoxi Wang, Ghose Bishwajit, Jie Xiong, Zhanchun Feng, Hang Fu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaGlobal Affairs Canada
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsHousehold debtMediationDebtMedicineOdds ratioDepressive symptomsPopulationLongitudinal studyDemographyGerontologyPsychologyPsychiatryEnvironmental healthEconomicsFinanceInternal medicineAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The Chinese household debt has been increasing rapidly in recent years because of the expansion of consumers' spending and mortgage. Its effects on individuals' mental and physical well-being are poorly known. This study aims to examine the relationship of household debt with hypertension and depressive symptoms among the middle- and old-aged population. METHODS: Nationally representative data were collected from China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study 2015. Logistic regression analysis and mediation analysis were used to estimate associations of household debt with the presence of hypertension and depressive symptoms. The Sobel test was used to assess the mediation effect of depressive symptoms in the association of household debt and hypertension. RESULTS: Among 12 274 subjects, those with high-level household debt exhibited 12% increased odds of hypertension and double odds of depressive symptoms compared to low-level household debtors. Household debt had a direct effect on hypertension and depressive symptoms and an indirect effect on hypertension via depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The relationships between household debt, depressive symptoms, and hypertension form a society-psychology-body view that is worth considering in household, community and clinical settings in hypertension management among middle-aged and elderly populations.

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)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Geriatric PsychiatrySame topicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisFrench-language works237,207