ArticlePloS one2026
Social determinants of healthy aging: An investigation using the all of us cohort.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe increasing aging population raises significant concerns about the ability of individuals to age healthily, avoiding chronic diseases and maintaining cognitive and physical functions. However, the pathways through which SDOH factors are associated with healthy aging remain unclear.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study uses the registered tier data from the All of Us Research Program (AoURP) registered tier dataset v7. Eligible study participants are those aged 50 and older who have responded to any of the SDOH survey questions with available EHR data. Three different algorithms were trained (logistic regression [LR], multi-layer perceptron [MLP], and extreme gradient boosting [XGBoost]). The outcome is healthy aging, which is measured by a composite score of the status for 1) comorbidities, 2) cognitive conditions, and 3) mobility function. We evaluate the model performance by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and assess the fairness of best-performed model through predictive parity. Feature importance is analyzed using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values.
resultsOur study included 99,935 participants aged 50 and above, and the mean (SD) age was 74 (9.3), with 55,294 (55.3%) females, 67,457 (67.5%) Whites, 11,109 (11.1%) Hispanic ethnicity, and 44,109 (44.1%) are classified as healthy aging. Most of the individuals lived in their own house (64%), were married (51%), obtained college or advanced degrees (74%), and had Medicare (56.2%). The best predictive model was XGBoost with random oversampler, with a performance of AUROC [95% CI]: 0.793 [0.788-0.796], F1 score: 0.697 [0.692-0.701], recall: 0.739 [0.732-0.748], precision: 0.659 [0.655-0.663], and accuracy: 0.716 [0.712-0.720], and the XGBoost model achieved predictive parity by similar positive and negative predictive values across race and sex groups (0.86-1.06). In feature importance analysis, health insurance type is ranked as the most predictive feature, followed by employment status, substance use, and health insurance coverage (yes/no).
conclusionIn this cohort study, XGBoost model accurately predicted individuals achieving healthy aging, outperforming LR and MLP. Our findings underscore the significant role of health insurance in contributing to healthy aging.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.