MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3137226627

Mood Disorder and Hypertension Among Canadian Older Adults with Different Religious Affiliations: A Cross-sectional Analysis of the Baseline Data from the CLSA

2021· other· en· W3137226627 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBrock University Digital Repository (Brock University) · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCross-sectional studyMoodBaseline (sea)MedicinePsychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryGerontologyPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The relationship between mood disorder and hypertension is not well understood among Canadian older adults. No research has examined whether religiosity has any impact on this relationship in a Canadian older adult population. Objectives: To examine i) the association between mood disorder and hypertension among older Canadian older adults and ii) if religion had an impact on this association Methods: Baseline data from the CLSA of 44,920 males and females aged 45 years and older was collected. Mood disorder and hypertension were defined by self-reported clinical diagnosis. Religious affiliation was categorized into two groups: no religious affiliation or some religious affiliation. Among religiously affiliated participants, religious attendance was categorized into four groups; daily/weekly, monthly, yearly and never in the past 12 months. Among non-religiously affiliated participants, religious attendance was categorized into two groups; no attendance and any form of attendance in the past 12 months. Logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between mood disorder, religious affiliation, religious attendance and hypertension. Age-related trends were also examined to see if any of the associations differed among different age groups. Results: The odds of reporting hypertension increased with self-reported mood disorder and/or religious affiliation by 27% (OR, [95% CI]: 1.27, [1.16, 1.39]) and 13% (OR, [95% CI]: 1.13, [1.04, 1.23]), respectively. As attendance to religious services and events increased, the magnitude of association between religious affiliation and hypertension decreased (OR, [95% CI]: 1.20 [1.09, 1.33] to 1.02, [0.92, 1.13]). Among religiously affiliated, the decrease in magnitude was more apparent (OR, [95% CI]: 1.01 [0.91, 1.12] to 0.85, [0.77, 0.93]). Conclusion: This study suggests that there is an association between mood disorder and hypertension, with the presence of mood disorder increasing the odds of hypertension. Similarly, being religiously affiliated seems to share a similar relationship with hypertension. To note, it seems as though the magnitude of the association between religious affiliation and hypertension decreases with increased attendance. This study will help to grow the ever-growing body of religious related literature and will be crucial in understanding the multifaceted nuanced nature of religion. Key Words: mood disorder, hypertension, religion, affiliation, CLSA

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)0.002
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrock University Digital Repository (Brock University)Same topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207