MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6920879314 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.22807628

Additional file 2 of Increased prevalence of loneliness and associated risk factors during the COVID-19 pandemic: findings from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA)

2023· article· en· W6920879314 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryMcGill UniversitySimon Fraser UniversityMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster UniversityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLonelinessLongitudinal studyPeriod (music)Longitudinal dataHealth and Retirement StudyValue (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Additional file 2. a: Predictors of loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic, adjusted for pre-pandemic loneliness and participant characteristics in the pre-pandemic period using an alternative cut-off value “≥4”. b: Predictors of loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic, adjusted for pre-pandemic loneliness and participant characteristics in the pre-pandemic period using an alternative cut-off value “≥6”. c: Predictors of loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic, adjusted for pre-pandemic loneliness and participant characteristics in the pre-pandemic period using lagged linear regression. d: Predictors of ln(loneliness) during the COVID-19 pandemic, adjusted for pre-pandemic ln(loneliness) and participant characteristics in the pre-pandemic period using lagged linear regression.

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)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.6000.033

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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.207 · 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.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicHealth disparities and outcomes→French-language works237,207→