Spousal Synchrony in Allostatic Load Among Older Couples in the Health and Retirement Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Using national data from the Health and Retirement Study, this study examined interpartner associations of allostatic load (AL) among 2338 different-sex couples ( N = 4676 individuals) over a 4-year period among older American couples from a dyadic approach. METHODS: AL was indexed by immune (C-reactive protein), metabolic (high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol, and glycosylated hemoglobin), renal (cystatin C), cardiovascular (systolic and diastolic blood pressures, pulse rate), and anthropometric (waist and body mass index) parameters using the traditional count-based formulation. Actor-partner interdependence models were used to assess interpartner concordance in AL. RESULTS: Higher partners' baseline AL was significantly associated with higher own AL both at baseline and 4 years later. In addition, partners' baseline AL was significantly associated with own AL 4 years later only in women but not men. Lastly, we did not observe any significant moderating effect of relationship quality on interpartner AL concordance. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that older couples' physiological responses to environmental stress are not only linked concurrently, but the associations persist after 4 years, alluding to long-term impacts of couples' psychosocial context and physiology on each other.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".