A cross-sectional study of financial distress in persons with multimorbidity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Financial distress among persons with multimorbidity is an important topic which has been inadequately addressed to date. OBJECTIVE: We examined the extent of financial distress among persons with multimorbidity, using data from the 2017 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). DESIGN: Cross-sectional, population-based study. PARTICIPANTS: Adults ages ≥ 18 years with multimorbidity. MAIN MEASURES: Low income and selected social determinants of health that are indicators of financial distress. KEY RESULTS: Multimorbidity was more common among those with a household income of less than $15,000 per year (P < 0.001) and among those who were 65 years of age or older (P < 0.001). There was an approximately linear increase in the percentage of individuals who had a household income of less than $15,000 or $25,000 per year with increasing number of morbidities. About one-quarter of individuals who had five or more morbidities had a household income of less than $15,000 per year as compared with 4.49% of individuals with no morbidities (P < 0.001). For all of the social determinants of health examined (Couldn't pay bills, didn't have money for food, didn't have money for balanced meals, didn't have enough money to make ends meet, and felt this kind of stress), there was an approximately linear increase in the percentage of individuals with an indicator of financial distress with increasing number of morbidities. Further research is needed examining the prevalence and correlates of financial distress in this population as well effective strategies for ameliorating its impact on the health and wellbeing of these persons.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".