MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7118063988 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igaf122.2336

The Economic Implications of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Older Adults in the U.S

2025· article· en· W7118063988 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael Vetter

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReceiptPaymentFalling (accident)PandemicGovernment (linguistics)PopulationQuarter (Canadian coin)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Older adults were among those most disproportionately affected by the Covid-19 pandemic. Research over previous years has outlined the changes to health, loneliness, and long-term well-being outcomes, in addition to economic impacts. This project recognizes and addresses a gap in the literature pertaining to the role of government economic impact payments (EIP) and labor force participation during the pandemic for older adults. Leveraging the Health and Retirement Study’s 2020 Core Survey and 2021 “Perspectives on the Pandemic” supplement, results highlight the demographic characteristics of the population of respondents (n = 2167) and the distribution of changes to economic and labor outcomes resulting from the pandemic. Most respondents noted having received an EIP and used this payment to primarily pay off existing debt, followed closely by contributing to savings. The majority were not working at the time of receipt and saw few changes to their economic situation throughout the pandemic. However, a stratified analysis of the payment amount showed that women received, overall, 31% less than men. Findings indicate that while labor force participation among this group was low, use of the economic payment indicates a need to address personal debt. Moreover, the gendered difference in total amount received may be the result of several factors, including the division of labor and labor force participation in older generations and the responsibilities of caregiving duties falling to women rather than men over the life course.

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)0.006
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in Aging→Same topicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts→French-language works237,207→