Seizing life with both hands: longitudinal analyses of grip strength among informal caregivers in Europe (SHARE)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This longitudinal study analyzed the association between informal caregiving inside and caregiving outside the household with changes in grip strength, and whether these associations varied based on caregivers’ gender and age among adults in Europe. METHODS: Data from the longitudinal Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) was used, including participants aged ≥ 40 years from 10 European countries (pooled over five waves; 2004–2015). Grip strength was measured as maximum grip strength of both hands, informal caregiving as transitions in status as caregiver inside or outside the household. Fixed Effects regression analysis was used, adjusted for health, body mass index and sociodemographic background and additional analyses were conducted with age and gender as moderators. RESULTS: Higher grip strength was found among those who transitioned into caregiving outside the household. With higher age, the association between caregiving outside the household and grip strength was stronger, and more pronounced among men. The transition into caregiving inside the household was associated with lower grip strength at older age. CONCLUSIONS: The location of caregiving, and caregiver’s age and gender play an important role for changes in grip strength. The findings suggest that caregiving outside the household might be helpful for grip strength, in particular for older and male adults. Older caregivers inside the household, however, seem to need more support to prevent further decline in grip strength.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".