Avoidable mortality across Canada from 1975 to 1999
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The concept of 'avoidable' mortality (AM) has been proposed as a performance measure of health care systems. In this study we examined mortality in five geographic regions of Canada from 1975 to 1999 for previously defined avoidable disease groups that are amenable to medical care and public health. These trends were compared to mortality from other causes. METHODS: National and regional age-standardized mortality rates for ages less than 65 years were estimated for avoidable and other causes of death for consecutive periods (1975-1979, 1980-1985, 1985-1989, 1990-1994, and 1995-1999). The proportion of all-cause mortality attributable to avoidable causes was also determined. RESULTS: From 1975-1979 to 1995-1999, the AM decrease (46.9%) was more pronounced compared to mortality from other causes (24.9%). There were persistent regional AM differences, with consistently lower AM in Ontario and British Columbia compared to the Atlantic, Quebec, and Prairies regions. This trend was not apparent when mortality from other causes was examined. Injuries, ischaemic heart disease, and lung cancer strongly influenced the overall AM trends. CONCLUSION: The regional differences in mortality for ages less than 65 years was attributable to causes of death amenable to medical care and public health, especially from causes responsive to public health.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".