MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6987787275

UNA REVISIÓN DE LOS FACTORES QUE CONTRIBUYEN A LA DEPRESIÓN EN LOS ÚLTIMOS AÑOS DE VIDA

2009· other· es· W6987787275 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueHispana · 2009
Typeother
Languagees
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsOffice of the Chief Medical Examiner
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDepression (economics)Coping (psychology)Physical illnessAffect (linguistics)Food intakeWeight lossScope (computer science)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Literature provides a wide variety of information about food intake, physical illness, and psychological disorders among the aging population.Late-onset of depression is one of the most common mental health problems in adults aged 60 or older.The primary purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between late-life depression and nutrition intake among older adults.Secondly, literature has indicated that late-life depression is influenced by genetic, situational, illness-related biological and psycho-social factors.However, late-life depression, relative to earlyonset depression, appears to be less influenced by genetics and more influenced by environmental factors.Psychological models postulate that late-life depression arises from the loss of self-esteem, loss of meaningful roles, loss of significant others, decline of social contacts, reduction of physical ability, financial difficulties and decline in coping skills.For these reasons, the contributing social, physical and psychological factors are briefly investigated in relation to nutritional aspects.Therefore, the scope of this paper will examine the social, physical, and psychological issues that directly or indirectly affect food intake and consequently depression in the elderly population.Key words: Late-

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHispanaFrench-language works237,207