MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4298000192 · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2022.961067

Can “Rover” help with mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic? Results from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA)

2022· article· en· W4298000192 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ryan S. Falck, Teresa Liu‐Ambrose, Matthew Noseworthy, Susan Kirkland, Lauren E. Griffith, Nicole E. Basta, Jacqueline M. McMillan, Parminder Raina

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityDalhousie UniversityUniversity of CalgaryMcGill UniversityImpactUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSimon Fraser UniversityCanada Research ChairsDalhousie UniversityMichael Smith Health Research BCUniversité de SherbrookeMcMaster UniversityMemorial University of NewfoundlandGovernment of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsAnxietyMental healthDepression (economics)MedicinePsychiatryPandemicMoodLongitudinal studyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)CohortClinical psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

COVID-19 has negatively affected the mental health and well-being of adults, and thus it is important to examine potential factors which may influence mental health during the pandemic. We thus examined the association between pet ownership and depression/anxiety symptoms based on mental health disorder status during the COVID-19 pandemic. We included 12,068 cognitively healthy participants (45–86 years at study entry) from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) comprehensive cohort who completed the first follow-up ([FU1]; 2015–2018), and COVID-19 Survey entry (April–May 2020) and exit (September-December 2020). Participants self-reported at FU1 if they owned a pet (yes/no). Participants were dichotomized as with or without a mental health disorder based on self-reported diagnosis of depression, anxiety, or mood disorders at baseline assessment (2011–2015) or FU1. Depressive symptoms were indexed using the 10-item Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CESD-10) at FU1, and COVID-19 entry/exit surveys. Anxiety symptoms were assessed using the General Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire (GAD-7) at COVID-19 entry/exit surveys. Final models adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, income, education, living status, smoking status, relationship status, and alcohol intake. Forty-percent of participants owned a pet at FU1. Among those without a mental health disorder, there were no significant differences in CESD-10 between participants who owned pets compared with those without pets. For people with a mental health disorder, pet owners had higher CESD-10 (estimated mean difference range: 0.56–1.02 points; p < 0.05) and GAD-7 scores (estimated mean difference range: 0.28–0.57 points; p < 0.05) at both COVID-19 entry and exit surveys. Among people with mental health disorders, pet ownership was associated with poor mental health symptoms during April 2020 to December 2020 of the COVID-19 pandemic.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychiatrySame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207