Associations Between Trust in Healthcare Professionals and Perceptions of Modifiability of Dementia and Stroke Risks Through Maintaining or Changing Lifestyle Habits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PurposeTo investigate the trust levels in health information sources from a United States (U.S.) sample, and to examine the relationships between trust in healthcare professionals (HCPs) and perceptions of modifiability of dementia and stroke risks through maintaining or changing lifestyle habits.DesignCross-sectional.SettingA survey distributed via the vendor platform Prolific to a sample of the U.S. population.ParticipantsData included on U.S. adults (n = 1478) in 2023.MeasuresOutcome variables were perceiving that dementia and stroke risk can be modified through maintaining or changing lifestyle habits. Independent variables were trust levels in HCPs.AnalysisDescriptive analysis was performed to assess levels of trust in information sources. Subsequently, we performed multivariable regression analyses between trust in HCPs and perceptions of risk modifiability in dementia and stroke. A hierarchal cluster analysis was conducted to characterize trust patterns in this cohort.ResultsParticipants with high trust in HCPs compared to those with low trust in HCPs were more likely to perceive that maintaining (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.57, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.15-2.12) and changing lifestyle habits (aOR = 1.72, 95% CI: 1.26-2.33) could reduce risk of dementia. Similar associations were found for perceptions of stroke risk reduction through maintaining (aOR = 1.49, 95% CI: 1.07-2.04) and changing (aOR = 2.68, 95% CI: 1.72-4.12) lifestyle habits. Cluster analyses identified three trust patterns amongst the participants: (i) a generally trusting cluster, (ii) a trusting of "official" health sources only cluster, and (iii) a generally not trusting cluster.ConclusionThis study found statistically significant associations between trusting HCPs and the perceptions that maintaining or changing lifestyle habits can modify risks of dementia and stroke, highlighting the importance of trust when developing preventive strategies.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".