Coresidence increases the risk of testing positive for COVID-19 among older Brazilians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Brazil is among the countries hit hardest by COVID-19, and older adults are among the vulnerable groups. Intergenerational coresidence and interdependence among family members, both prevalent in Brazil, likely increase social and physical contact and thus potential infection. METHODS: Using nationally representative data from the COVID-19 module of the Brazilian National Household Sample Survey (Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios), collected between July and November of 2020, we examined the association between living arrangements and exposure to and testing for COVID-19 among 63,816 Brazilians aged 60 years and older. We examine whether living arrangements influence self-reported COVID-19 symptoms as an indicator of subjective health assessment, testing as an indicator of health care service use, and a positive COVID-19 test result as an objective indicator of exposure to the disease. RESULTS: Living arrangements shape older adults' vulnerabilities to COVID-19 exposure and testing. Specifically, those living alone were more likely to report having symptoms and having had a test for COVID-19. However, older adults in multigenerational and skipped generation households were more likely than solo-dwellers to test positive for COVID-19. Those with symptoms were more likely to test, regardless of their living arrangement. Among older adults without symptoms, those living alone had a higher probability of testing than those living in multigenerational or skipped-generation households. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our findings suggest that coresidence with younger family members puts older adults' health at risk in the context of COVID-19. As younger Brazilians are increasingly vulnerable to COVID-19 and experiencing severe outcomes, policy makers need to be more attentive to the health needs of households that comprise older and younger cohorts, which are also more prevalent in poor and marginalized segments of the 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".