Are Older Persons in China Living More Years in an Independent Living Arrangement? Estimates Using Multistate Life Tables
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adopting a multistate life table approach, this study estimates number of years the very old in China expect to live in an independent living arrangement (alone or with spouse only)-an estimate we term "independent living life expectancy" (ILLE)-as opposed to in coresidence with adult children or others. We also estimate how ILLE and proportion of total life expectancy (TLE) residing independently has changed over time. The backdrop for this study is a society experiencing both increasing longevity and social changes that influence the tendency to live in an independent living arrangement. The study concentrates on assessing whether changes in ILLE match or surpass gains in TLE experienced by oldest-old Chinese adults. Data are from the 2002-2014 Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Survey, and estimation is conducted using the Stochastic Population Analysis for Complex Events software. Results suggest that on balance, gains in ILLE are proportionately greater than gains in TLE, indicating an expansion of ILLE for most Chinese elders. Males, septuagenarian females, and disabled septuagenarians are the most likely to be living proportionately longer lives in an independent living arrangement. In contrast, extremely old (nonagenarian and centenarian) females and extremely old disabled individuals are least likely to have experienced dramatic changes in proportion of life residing independently. The findings imply some support for the hypothesis that given the maintenance of family solidarity in China, those in greatest need are least likely to encounter the most extreme changes toward independent living arrangements.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".