Volunteering in Young Adulthood: Complex Associations With Later Health and Well-Being Outcomes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: in volunteering from adolescence to young adulthood are associated with subsequent health and well-being outcomes in adulthood. DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort study. SETTING: National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health. SUBJECTS: U.S. adults from Wave IV (2008/2009; N = 12,234) and Wave V (2016-2018; N = 9,971). MEASURES: Any volunteering and nine types of volunteering (independent variables) and 41 health and well-being outcomes (dependent variables) using an outcome-wide approach with multiple linear-, logistic-, and generalized linear regressions. RESULTS: Volunteering in young adulthood was associated with better health behaviors (e.g., 34% decreased risk of binge drinking, 95% CI [0.54, 0.81]) and improved psychosocial and civic outcomes (e.g., lower depressive symptoms (β = -0.08, 95% CI [-0.14, -0.02]) in adulthood. Volunteering showed little evidence of associations with other health and well-being outcomes (e.g., loneliness, (β = -0.04, 95% CI [-0.09, 0.01])). Assessing volunteering by organization types showed a range of positive and negative outcomes. For example, volunteering in hospitals/nursing homes was associated with a 36% increased risk of high cholesterol (95% CI [1.06, 1.73]) and volunteering with political clubs was associated with a 52% increased risk of an anxiety diagnosis (95% CI [1.13, 2.05]). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest more work is needed to determine the conditions under which volunteering is health promoting and to minimize potential adverse effects associated with some types of volunteering.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it