MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134980879 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0247065

When women eat last: Discrimination at home and women’s mental health

2021· article· en· W3134980879 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Payal Hathi, Diane Coffey, Amit Thorat, Nazar Khalid

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institutes of HealthBill and Melinda Gates FoundationInternational Growth CentreUniversity of Texas at Austin
KeywordsMental healthSocioeconomic statusAutonomyQuarter (Canadian coin)MedicineGerontologyEnvironmental healthPsychologyDemographyPsychiatryPopulationGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2011 India Human Development Survey found that in about a quarter of Indian households, women are expected to have their meals after men have finished eating. This study investigates whether this form of gender discrimination is associated with worse mental health outcomes for women. Our primary data source is a new, state-representative mobile phone survey of women ages 18-65 in Bihar, Jharkhand, and Maharashtra in 2018. We measure mental health using questions from the World Health Organization's Self-Reporting Questionnaire. We find that, for women in these states, eating last is correlated with worse mental health, even after accounting for differences in socioeconomic status. We discuss two possible mechanisms for this relationship: eating last may be associated with worse mental health because it is associated with worse physical health, or eating last may be associated with poor mental health because it is associated with less autonomy, or both.

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)0.003
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations37
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207