MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405965085 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igae098.2487

SOCIAL NETWORKING SITE USE AND MENTAL HEALTH IN OLDER LGB CANADIANS IN THE CLSA

2024· article· en· W4405965085 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alexandra Grady, Arne Stinchcombe

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPsychologySociologyGerontologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Internet has historically been an important avenue for social connection between lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) people. Social networking sites (SNS) may have positive mental health impacts for LGB people. Limited research has explored SNS use in older LGB adults. The purpose of this study was to examine SNS use by sexual orientation in a sample of heterosexual and LGB Canadians using data collected from Follow-up 1 of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (n=21,836; 583 LGB). Participants completed self-report measures of SNS use, depression symptoms (CESD-10), and loneliness (UCLA 3-item Loneliness Scale). After adjusting for age, gender, income, and education, a significant difference remained in the odds of LGB participants using SNS to make new friends (OR = 1.82, p<.001) and promote themselves or their work (OR = 1.34, p=.005) in comparison to heterosexual participants. In terms of mental health, the linear regression treating depression as the outcome variable showed an interaction between being LGB and using SNS to stay in touch with friends (B=-1.23, p=.012), such that using SNS to stay in touch with friends as an LGB person was associated with fewer depression symptoms. The linear regression treating loneliness as the outcome variable showed an interaction between being LGB and using SNS to make new friends (B=.44, p=.013), indicating that LGB people who use SNS to make new friends report more loneliness than heterosexual people who use SNS to make new friends. This study adds to the growing literature on how older LGB adults use SNS.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207