Directions of Longitudinal Relationships between Housing-related Control Beliefs and Activities of Daily Living among People with Parkinson’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The gerontological literature suggests that external housing-related control beliefs (HCB) influence activities of daily living (ADL) among older people, but knowledge is scarce for people with Parkinson's disease (PD). This longitudinal study aimed to explore the directions of the relationship between external HCB and ADL among people with PD. Methods: Baseline (T1) and 3-year follow-up data (T2) were collected from 154 people with PD (mean age = 68 years, T1). Two regression analyses were applied, where dependent (T2 values) and independent (T1 values) variables-external HCB score and PD specific ADL (PADLS)-were switched, adjusting for age, disease severity, cognitive functioning, and accessibility problems. Results: = .006). Discussion: ADL difficulties seem to lead to higher external HCB, but not the other way around, which contradicts assumptions in environmental gerontology theories. This new knowledge can promote theory development. While additional studies are required to verify whether this is a disease-specific finding, this indicates the importance of targeting ADL if the purpose is to influence external HCB among people with PD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".