The relationship between spousal empowerment, quality of life, and subjective wellbeing among disabled elderly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: As rapidly ages, the number of disabled elderly is increasing, leading to lower quality of life and greater psychological stress. Aim: To explore the relationship between spousal empowerment, quality of life, and subjective wellbeing (SWB) among disabled elderly, providing insights and practical guidance for enhancing SWB in this demographic. Method: A convenience sampling approach was employed to select 332 disabled elderly and their spouses. Research tools included a demographic survey, the Barthel Index (BI), the World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment - Older Adults Version (WHOQOL-OLD), the Memorial University of Newfoundland Scale of Happiness (MUNSH), and the Main Caregivers' Empowerment Measurement (MCEM). Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS and AMOS. Result: = 0.032) as significant predictors of SWB. The results of testing the mediating role of spousal empowerment using the structural equation model show that quality of life directly predicted SWB with a path coefficient of 0.208 (95% CI: 0.065, 0.289). Spousal empowerment partially mediated the relationship between quality of life and SWB, with a mediation effect of 0.067 (95% CI: 0.026, 0.098). Conclusion: Both quality of life and spousal empowerment can positively influence the SWB of disabled elderly. Additionally, spousal empowerment partially mediates the relationship between quality of life and SWB.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".