MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982770938 · doi:10.1080/09581590600828816

Neo-Marxist class position and socioeconomic status: Distinct or complementary determinants of health?

2006· article· en· W1982770938 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Gerry Veenstra

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Public Health · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusMarxist philosophySocial classPrestigePosition (finance)Mental healthSociologyOccupational prestigeSample (material)SocioeconomicsSocial sciencePsychologyPolitical scienceDemographyEconomicsPopulationLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the relationship between socioeconomic status and health has received careful attention from health researchers over the past half-century, the means by which income, education and occupational prestige are accumulated in society have received relatively short shrift in the health literature. This article explores the degree to which neo-Marxist conceptualizations of class position are ‘upstream’ determinants of health and well-being. Utilizing data from a survey sample of randomly selected and full-time employed residents of 25 communities in the Canadian province of British Columbia, it evaluates the usefulness of class position distinctions derived from the work of Erik Olin Wright as predictors of physical and mental health before and after controlling for socioeconomic status.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.013
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.341 · 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

Citations8
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Public HealthSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207