MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409286160 · doi:10.1186/s12962-024-00584-7

Association between medical insurance and life satisfaction among middle-aged and older adults in China: the mediating role of depression

2025· article· en· W4409286160 on OpenAlexaff
Jian Sun, Peter C. Coyte, Yujiang Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueCost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealthcare Systems and Reforms
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Work & HealthToronto Public Health
FundersGovernment of Jiangsu ProvinceGuangxi Medical UniversityChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesMinistry of Education of the People's Republic of China
KeywordsMedicineDepression (economics)Quality of Life ResearchHealth administrationPublic healthChinaHealth economicsHealth services researchLife satisfactionAssociation (psychology)PsychiatryGerontologyDemographyPsychologyNursingSocial psychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: While studies have reported a positive association between medical insurance and life satisfaction, there is a lack of studies assessing the underlying impact mechanism. The present study aims to investigate the association between Urban and Rural Resident Basic Medical Insurance (URRBMI) and life satisfaction in China, focusing on the mediating role of depression. METHODS: Using 2018 wave of China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study, we employed ordered logit regression models to examine the correlation between URRBMI and life satisfaction. Causal mediation analysis was used to analyze the mediating effect of depression on this association. RESULTS: URRBMI participation was related to greater life satisfaction (p < 0.01). Depression mediated the correlation between URRBMI and life satisfaction, and the percentage of total effect mediated was 18.20%. DISCUSSION: Middle-aged and older adults covered by URRBMI were more likely to have greater life satisfaction than their counterparts because insurance relieved depression. CONCLUSION: Our study highlighted many policy suggestions, such as improving its coverage, establishing a unified information platform, and mobilizing social forces to provide better life services.

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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCost Effectiveness and Resource AllocationSame topicHealthcare Systems and ReformsFrench-language works237,207