MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388366315 · doi:10.1016/j.dhjo.2023.101543

The link between disability and social participation revisited: Heterogeneity by type of social participation and by socioeconomic status

2023· article· en· W4388366315 on OpenAlexaff
Jinho Kim, Gum‐Ryeong Park, Eun Ha Namkung

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and health journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusAssociation (psychology)Social engagementPsychologyVolunteerDevelopmental psychologyGerontologyDemographyMedicinePopulationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: While prior literature explores the impact of disability on social participation, the distinct characteristics of diverse social activities could further complicate this relationship. Furthermore, this relationship may exhibit heterogeneity when considering socioeconomic status (SES). OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate whether the relationship between disability and social participation differs depending on the type of social participation, and to what extent this relationship is moderated by SES. METHODS: Data from seven waves of the Korean Longitudinal Study of Ageing were analyzed. Various types of social participation, including socializing, leisure, volunteer, political, and religious activities, were considered. Individual fixed effects models were employed to account for unobserved individual-level heterogeneity. To investigate the potential moderating role of SES, an interaction term between disability and SES was included. RESULTS: Disability was associated with a decrease in social participation (b = -0.088). When differentiating types of social participation, the associations were negative for socializing and leisure activities (b = -0.092 and b = -0.012, respectively) and positive for volunteer activities (b = 0.012). The negative association between disability and social participation was generally stronger among higher-SES groups than lower-SES groups. Specifically, the negative association with leisure activities was more pronounced among the high-education groups. In contrast, the positive association with volunteer activities was more evident among the low-education group. CONCLUSIONS: Disability has a negative association with engagement in socializing and leisure activities and a positive association with engagement in volunteer activities. Policymakers should consider the role of SES in complicating the relationship between disability and social participation.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.342 · 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

Citations26
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and health journalSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207