MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1577771711

The Relationship between Age, Socio-Economic Status, and Health among Adult Canadians

2001· preprint· en· W1577771711 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Steven G. Prus

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2001
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialLife course approachSocioeconomic statusGerontologyPsychologyDemographic economicsPopulationDemographyGeographyMedicineSociologyEconomicsDevelopmental psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relationship between socio-economic status and the health status of Canadians is well documented. However, the dynamics of this relationship over the adult life course remain largely unexplored. This paper uses data from the 1998-1999 Canadian National Population Health Survey to examine differences in global measures of health status (functional health, activity restriction, and self-rated health) between education groups across age categories. The results show that the gap in health status across education groups varies over the life course. The strength of the relationship increases from ages 25 to 64, and then decreases in later life. The data also show that education- based differences in health over the adult years almost disappear when controlling for economic, lifestyle, and psychosocial resources. Implications of these findings for health-related policy and methodological issues are discussed.

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)0.004
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations6
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics→Same topicHealth disparities and outcomes→French-language works237,207→