MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392761507 · doi:10.1080/07317115.2024.2329150

Stability and Change in Mental Health Profiles from Middle Adulthood to Very Old Age

2024· article· en· W4392761507 on OpenAlexaff
Arielle Bonneville‐Roussy, François Laberge

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Gerontologist · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLonelinessMental healthPsychological interventionWell-beingPsychologyQuality of life (healthcare)GerontologyLife satisfactionSuccessful agingMedicinePsychiatrySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This study investigates mental health (MH) through the dual-factor model, emphasizing both well-being and ill-being. Our objectives were to (1) identify MH profiles based on this model; (2) track these profiles over time; and (3) explore socio-demographic and physical health factors associated with these profiles. METHODS: We employed Latent Transition Analysis on data from 5,561 individuals aged 39-92, using two waves from the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe. Well-being was assessed via life satisfaction and quality of life, while ill-being was measured through depression and loneliness. The predictors were socio-demographic and physical health variables. RESULTS: Four distinct MH profiles emerged, each with unique levels of well-being and ill-being. Stability was more common in adaptive profiles. Physical health was key in predicting transition. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying MH profiles in old age enhances our understanding of how MH adapts with aging. This approach reveals the complexity of MH beyond traditional ill-being, underscoring the importance of well-being. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: • The majority of older adults maintain good MH, suggesting a need for a paradigm shift toward enhancing well-being rather than solely treating ill-being.• Effective MH interventions should integrate both well-being and ill-being assessments to offer understanding and support.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.338
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical GerontologistSame topicAging and Gerontology ResearchFrench-language works237,207