Do Personality Traits Predict Mobility Outcomes among Community-Dwelling Older Adults in Nigeria?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To describe the association between personality factors and mobility outcomes among community-dwelling older adults in Nigeria.Methods: This cross-sectional study included 136 older adults [mean age (SD) = 65.1 (5.4)]. The Five-Factor Model of personality was evaluated using the International Personality Item Pool. Participants’ mobility was assessed using gait speed, life-space questionnaire, chair-stand and standing-balance tests. Data was analyzed using multiple linear regression.Results: Extraversion (β = 0.152, p = 0.049), conscientiousness (β = 0.238, p = 0.006), and neuroticism (β = −0.194, p = 0.016) were associated with lower extremity strength. Extraversion (β = 0.201, p = 0.021) and neuroticism (β = −0.201, p = 0.020) were associated with community mobility. No personality factor was a predictor of gait speed or balance.Conclusion: These findings may help clinicians understand the predictive power of personality and guide the development and refinement of personality-tailored interventions to improve older adults’ mobility.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it