MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3121630158

Comparing the Relationship Between Stature and Later Life Health in Six Low and Middle Income Countries

2014· preprint· en· W3121630158 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mark E. McGovern

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2014
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrip strengthProxy (statistics)Standard deviationQuarter (Canadian coin)DemographyInequalityGeographyStandard of livingGerontologyDemographic economicsMedicineEconomicsStatisticsMathematicsPhysical therapySociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the relationship between stature and later life health in 6 emerging economies, each of which are expected to experience significant increases in the mean age of their populations over the coming decades. Using data from the WHO Study on Global Ageing and Adult Health (SAGE) and pilot data from the Longitudinal Ageing Study in India (LASI), I show that various measures of health are associated with height, a commonly used proxy for childhood environment. In the pooled sample, a 10cm increase in height is associated with between a 2 and 3 percentage point increase in the probability of being in very good or good self-reported health, a 3 percentage point increase in the probability of reporting no difficulties with activities of daily living or instrumental activities of daily living, and between a fifth and a quarter of a standard deviation increase in grip strength and lung function. Adopting a methodology previously used in the research on inequality, I also summarise the height-grip strength gradient for each country using the concentration index, and provide a decomposition analysis.

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)0.004
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics→Same topicBirth, Development, and Health→French-language works237,207→