MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387212197 · doi:10.1186/s12877-023-04350-x

Quality of life and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic: associations with loneliness and social isolation in a cross-sectional, online survey of 2,207 community-dwelling older Canadians

2023· article· en· W4387212197 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jennifer L. Briere, Sophia Haotong Wang, Ulfat Khanam, Josh Lawson, Donna Goodridge

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Geriatrics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsLonelinessSocial isolationQuality of life (healthcare)GerontologyMedicineSocial supportUCLA Loneliness ScaleCross-sectional studyPandemicContext (archaeology)Mental healthScale (ratio)Social distanceDemographyPsychologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychiatrySocial psychologyDiseaseNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The far-reaching health and social sequelae of the COVID-19 pandemic among older adults have the potential to negatively impact both quality of life (QoL) and well-being, in part because of increased risks of loneliness and social isolation. The aim of this study was to examine predictors of QoL and well-being among Canadian older adults within the context of the pandemic, including loneliness and social isolation. METHODS: This cross-sectional, online survey recruited older adult participants through community organizations and research participant panels. Measures included the: Older People's Quality of Life Scale-B, WHO-5, DeJong Gierveld Loneliness Scale, Lubben Social Network Scale and five COVID-19 specific items assessing impact on loneliness and social isolation. Multiple linear regression models were used to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: A total of 2,207 older Canadians (55.7% female, with a mean age of 69.4 years) responded to the survey. Over one-third strongly disagreed that the pandemic had had a significant effect on either their mental (35.0%) or physical health (37.6%). Different patterns of predictors were apparent for QoL and well-being. After adjusting for all variables in the models, the ability of income to meet needs emerged as the strongest predictor of higher QoL, but was not associated with well-being, except for those who chose not to disclose their income adequacy. Age was not associated with either QoL or well-being. Females were more likely to experience lower well-being (β=-2.0, 95% C.I. =-4.0,-0.03), but not QoL. Reporting three or more chronic health conditions and that the COVID-19 pandemic had a negative impact on mental health was associated with lower QoL and well-being. Loneliness was a predictor of reduced QoL (β=-1.4, 95% C.I. =--1.6, -1.2) and poor well-being (β=-3.7, 95% C.I. =-4.3,-3.0). A weak association was noted between QoL and social isolation. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic is associated with differential effects among older adults. In particular, those with limited financial resources and those with multiple chronic conditions may be at more risk to suffer adverse QoL and well-being consequences. Loneliness may be a modifiable risk factor for decreased QoL and well-being amenable to targeted interventions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.267
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations25
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC GeriatricsSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207