MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255503307 · doi:10.1037//0278-6133.21.4.340

Health stresses and depressive symptomatology in the elderly: The importance of health engagement control strategies.

2002· article· en· W4255503307 on OpenAlexaff
Carsten Wrosch, Richard Schulz, Jutta Heckhausen

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Psychology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsDepressive symptomsMental healthLongitudinal studyClinical psychologyPsychologyPhysical healthCognitionDepression (economics)GerontologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study presents cross-sectional (N = 127) and longitudinal (n = 111) analyses examining relations between health engagement control strategies (HECSs), depressive symptoms, and health stresses in elderly individuals. HECS was measured as people's behavioral and cognitive investments toward attaining health goals. HECS was related to low levels of depressive symptoms, particularly among people experiencing acute physical symptoms. Moreover, HECS predicted reduction of depressive symptoms over time, and depressive symptomatology predicted negative change in HECS. The findings show that active investments of HECSs significantly moderate the negative affective consequences of health threats. Individuals who are characterized by low levels of HECS and high levels of depressive symptoms may be at increased risk of accelerated decline in their physical and mental health.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth PsychologySame topicHealth and Well-being StudiesFrench-language works237,207