MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400830628 · doi:10.1007/s10433-024-00816-y

Older caregivers’ depressive symptomatology over time: evidence from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe

2024· article· en· W4400830628 on OpenAlexaff
Marie Agapitos, Graciela Muñiz‐Terrera, Annie Robitaille

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Ageing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsCARE CanadaUniversity of OttawaUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNational Institute on AgingMax-Planck-GesellschaftOsteopathic Heritage Foundation
KeywordsAgeingPublic healthDepressive symptomsGerontologyPsychologyHealthy ageingMedicinePsychiatryNursingCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prevalence of informal caregiving is increasing as populations across the world age. Caregiving has been found to be associated with poor mental health outcomes including depressive symptoms. The purpose of this study is to examine the mean trajectory of depressive symptomatology in older caregivers in a large European sample over an eight-year period, the effects of time-varying and time-invariant covariates on this trajectory, and the mean trajectory of depressive symptomatology according to pattern of caregiving. The results suggest that depressive symptoms in the full sample of caregivers follow a nonlinear trajectory characterized by an initial decrease which decelerates over time. Caregiver status and depressive symptoms were significantly associated such that depressive symptoms increased as a function of caregiver status. The trajectory in caregivers who report intermittent or consecutive occasions of caregiving remained stable over time. Significant associations were found between sociodemographic, health and caregiving characteristics and the initial levels and rates of change of these trajectories. While these results point to the resilience of caregivers, they also highlight the factors that are related to caregivers' adaptation over time. This can help in identifying individuals who may require greater supports and, in turn, ensuring that caregivers preserve their well-being.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of AgeingSame topicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingFrench-language works237,207