MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163600721

The Predictive Factors of the Elderly Social Support in Tehran City, 2017

2019· article· en· W3163600721 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ali Darvishpoor Kakhki, Hanieh Gholamnejad

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in nursing and midwifery · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpouseSocial supportDescriptive statisticsMarital statusPsychologyGerontologyCluster samplingFamily supportElderly peopleTest (biology)Regression analysisMedicineSocial psychologyEnvironmental healthStatisticsPopulationSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/objective: social support is one of the most important aspects of the life of the elderly which shows the amount of enjoying from love, help, and attention of family members, friends, and others. Therefore, the present study aims at determining the predictors of the amount of social support in the elderly of Tehran. Methods: this was a descriptive-analytic study; using cluster sampling, it was conducted on 400 elderly people visiting the parks in Tehran five districts in 2017. The personal information questionnaire and “the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS)-Social Support questionnaire” were used for data collection after confirming their reliability and validity. Data were analyzed using SPSS 20 software, descriptive statistics, T-test, Pearson correlation, and regression analysis. Result: the average age and the elderly social support scores were 69.1 (±7.09) and 75.33 (±20.53). The results of multiple linear regression indicated that the variables of life companions (B=3.41), marital status (B=2.47), and housing status (B=-2.87) are regarded as predicting variables of social support. Conclusion: the married elderly, those who live with their spouse and children or those owning a personal house are more socially supported than the other elderly people. The educational level and the number of children did not have a significant relationship with the amount of social support. It seems that increased support for the elderly caregivers, training specialist forces for the elderly and organizing family consultation for the elderly and their family are effective in increasing emotional support.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.367
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in nursing and midwiferySame topicHealth and Well-being StudiesFrench-language works237,207