Ikigai and subsequent health and wellbeing among Japanese older adults: Longitudinal outcome-wide analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Having a purpose in life has been linked to improved health and wellbeing; however, it remains unknown whether having " Ikigai "—a related but broader concept in Japan—is also beneficial for various physical and psychosocial outcomes. Methods Using data from a nationwide longitudinal study of Japanese older adults aged ≥65 years, we examined the associations between having Ikigai in 2013 and a wide range of subsequent outcomes assessed in 2016 across two databases (n = 6,441 and n = 8,041), including dimensions of physical health, health behavior, psychological distress, social wellbeing, subjective wellbeing, and pro-social/altruistic behaviors. We adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics and the outcome values (whenever data were available) in the prior wave (2010). Findings Having Ikigai (vs. not having Ikigai ) was associated with a 31% lower risk of developing functional disability [95% confidence interval (CI) for risk ratio: 0.58, 0.82] and 36% lower risk of developing dementia [95% CI for risk ratio: 0.48, 0.86] during the three-year follow-up. Having Ikigai was associated with decreased depressive symptoms and hopelessness as well as higher happiness, life satisfaction, instrumental activity of daily living, and certain social outcomes (e.g., more frequent participation in hobby clubs). Some of these associations were stronger for men than women, and among individuals with high socioeconomic status (p-values for effect measure modification < 001). Interpretation Having Ikigai may promote health and wellbeing outcomes among Japanese older adults, but particularly men and individuals with high socioeconomic status. Funding NIH, John Templeton Foundation, JSPS, AMED, MHLW, MEXT, and WPE Foundation.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".