Functional Disability Among Middle-Aged and Older Adults in China: The Intersecting Roles of Ethnicity, Social Class, and Urban/Rural Residency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores how ethnicity, family income, and education level differentiate patterns of functional limitations among urban and rural Chinese (aged 45 ≥ years). Based on the 2018 China Family Panel Studies (CFPS) (n = 16,589), this nationwide study employed binary/multinomial logistic regression analyses, stratified by urban/rural residency, to estimate the likelihood of instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) disability (0/1-2/≥3 limitations) by social determinants of health (SDoH). The estimated overall prevalence of IADLs disability was 14.3%. The multivariable analyses did not find significant ethnic disparity in IADLs disability in urban China, while in rural China, ethnic minorities were 44% more likely to have IADLs disability than Han Chinese. Among rural residents, Mongolians, Tibetans, and Yi minority more than tripled the odds of having ≥3 limitations than Han Chinese; and the intersections of ethnicity and social class were associated with functional limitations. Long-term care and anti-poverty programs should target minority aging populations in rural China.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".