MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410132897 · doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2025.107649

Spouses’ Individual and Shared Cumulative Risk: Implications for Functional Health and Longevity in Older Adulthood

2025· article· en· W4410132897 on OpenAlexaff
Shannon T. Mejía, Tai-Te Su, Jacqui Smith, Richard Gonzalez

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Preventive Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of Michigan
KeywordsLongevityCumulative riskGerontologyMedicinePsychologyEnvironmental healthDemographyInternal medicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Multisystem biological risk, a marker of physiological dysregulation, accumulates over time in response to exposure and adaptation to chronic stress. Spousal concordance in health and health behaviors indicates potential for shared risk to accumulate within couples. This study examined spouses' shared multisystem biological risk as a modifier of individual risk and predictor of future functional limitations and mortality. METHODS: Biomarkers and physical measures from 3,856 heterosexual couples (77%White, 31% college degree) were collected from the 2008/2010 waves of the Health and Retirement Study to construct individual and shared frailty, cardiometabolic, and total risk indices and predict functional limitations and survival at 2016/2018. RESULTS: Multilevel Poisson and logistic regressions showed couples' cumulative shared frailty, cardiometabolic, and total risk to be associated with the number of functional limitations and survival status at follow-up. Spouses' shared cardiometabolic and total risks attenuated the effects of respective individual risks. Results were partially explained by partner selection and health experiences. Predicted probabilities were compared to gender-stratified models. The Receiver Operating Characteristic curve showed models of shared risk to have greater predictive power. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study indicate that the cost of adaptation manifests not only in individuals, but also through an additional pathway that is co-constructed and shared by spouses. These findings underscore the critical role of shared context between individuals and their spouses in the treatment process.

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)0.010
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.368 · 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 abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Preventive MedicineSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207