MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202595143 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20200205

Subjective social isolation or loneliness in older adults residing in social housing in Ontario: a cross-sectional study

2021· article· en· W3202595143 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Gina Agarwal, Melissa Pirrie, Angela Gao, Ricardo Angeles, Francine Marzanek

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health Sciences
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsLonelinessSocial isolationGerontologyOdds ratioCross-sectional studyDemographyOddsPublic housingPopulationConfidence intervalUCLA Loneliness ScaleLogistic regressionSocial supportPsychologyMedicineEnvironmental healthSocial psychologySociologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background:</h3> Older adults face greater risk of social isolation, but the extent of social isolation among low-income older adults living in social housing is unknown. This study aims to explore the rate of, and risk factors contributing to, subjective social isolation or loneliness among older adults in social housing. <h3>Methods:</h3> We conducted a cross-sectional study of data collected from a community program held in the common rooms of 55 social housing buildings in 14 communities across Ontario, Canada, from May 2018 to April 2019. Participants were program attendees aged 55 years and older who resided in the buildings. Program implementers assessed social isolation using the 3-Item Loneliness Scale from the University of California, Los Angeles and risk factors using common primary care screening tools. We extracted data for this study from the program database. We compared the rate of social isolation to Canadian Community Health Survey data using a 1-sample χ<sup>2</sup> test, and evaluated associations between risk factors and social isolation using univariate and multivariate logistic regressions. <h3>Results:</h3> We included 806 residents in 30 buildings for older adults and 25 mixed-tenant buildings. Based on the 3-Item UCLA Loneliness Scale, 161 (20.0%) of the 806 participants were socially isolated. For those aged 65 and older, the rate of social isolation was nearly twice that observed in the same age group of the general population (36.1% v. 19.6%; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). Risk factors were age (65–84 yr v. 55–64 yr adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01–3.93), alcohol consumption (adjusted OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.09–5.54), anxiety or depression (adjusted OR 6.05, 95% CI 3.65–10.03) and income insecurity (adjusted OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.24–3.53). Protective factors were having at least 1 chronic cardiometabolic disease (adjusted OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.24–0.80), being physically active (adjusted OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30–0.73) and having good to excellent general health (adjusted OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.39–0.90). <h3>Interpretation:</h3> The high rate of social isolation in low-income older adults living in social housing compared with the general population is concerning. Structural barriers could prevent engagement in social activities or maintenance of social support, especially for older adults with income insecurity and anxiety or depression; interventions are needed to reduce subjective social isolation in this population.

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)0.002
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 score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.618

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207