Title: Sex disparities in the prevalence of disabilities: A population-based study in a low-income community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Functional disability continues to be a significant public health problem that increases older adults’ vulnerability to experience a diminished quality of life, loss of independence, higher healthcare costs and health services utilization, and increased risks of mortality. Thus, we aimed to study the prevalence of disabilities by sex according to the types of daily living activities, controlling for specific sociodemographic variables among older Hispanics from low-income communities.Methods: We used a cross-sectional epidemiological research design, considering a complex sampling design of households to interview adults ≥65 years living in low-income communities in Puerto Rico. Functional disability was measured by the PROMIS ® Physical Function Short Form-20 T-score. The prevalences of disability were estimated using the logistic regression model, weighting by the effect of the sampling. Our estimated prevalences were compared between sexes using the prevalence ratio (PR), which was estimated with logistic regression models, controlling for age, income, number of chronic conditions, high and low impact of chronic conditions in functional disabilities, marital status, and sampling design.Results: We recruited 211 older Hispanics from randomly selected sample. Their mean age was 74.4 ± 7.1 years, with female predominance (57.3%). The estimated prevalence of physical function disability using T-score among females was 2.70 (95% CI: 1.4, 5.1) times the estimated prevalence of physical function disability among males. Women were more likely to report functional disabilities in instrumental activities of daily living, self-care activities, and functional mobility compared to males. These sex differences were largely explained by differences in disability-related chronic conditions.Conclusions: The females in our study bear the greater burden of physical function disability in their adult age. Health policies as well as future studies should be targeted at reducing the burden of physical function disabilities in different types of daily activities through gender sensitive disability self-management programs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".