MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186956566 · doi:10.1007/s10943-021-01348-w

Are Religiosity and Spirituality Related to Self-Reported Health Expectancy? An Analysis of the European Values Survey

2021· article· en· W3186956566 on OpenAlexafffund
Gillian Libby, Zachary Zimmer, Andrew Kingston, Clove Haviva, Chi‐Tsun Chiu, Mary Beth Ofstedal, Yasuhiko Saito, Carol Jagger

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Religion and Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityMount Saint Vincent University
FundersEconomic and Social Research CouncilSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaJohn Templeton Foundation
KeywordsReligiositySpiritualityLife expectancyChurch attendancePublic healthAttendancePrayerPsychologyEuropean Social SurveyConfoundingDemographyExpectancy theorySocial psychologyClinical psychologyMedicineSociologyPolitical sciencePopulationTheologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research on religiosity and health has generally focussed on the United States, and outcomes of health or mortality but not both. Using the European Values Survey 2008, we examined cross-sectional associations between four dimensions of religiosity/spirituality: attendance, private prayer, importance of religion, belief in God; and healthy life expectancy (HLE) based on self-reported health across 47 European countries (n = 65,303 individuals). Greater levels of private prayer, importance of religion and belief in God, at a country level, were associated with lower HLE at age 20, after adjustment for confounders, but only in women. The findings may explain HLE inequalities between European countries.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.343 · 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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Religion and HealthSame topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207