MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986285594 · doi:10.3402/ijch.v71i0.17520

Preterm birth in the Inuit and First Nations populations of Québec, Canada, 1981–2008

2012· article· en· W1986285594 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nathalie Auger, Mélanie Fon Sing, Alison L. Park, Ernest Lo, Normand Trempe, Zhong‐Cheng Luo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Circumpolar Health · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitut National de Santé Publique du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographyResidenceRest (music)GeographyHazard ratioConfidence intervalIndigenousMedicineRelative riskSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate preterm birth (PTB) for Inuit and First Nations vs. non-Indigenous populations in the province of Québec, Canada. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: We evaluated singleton live births for Québec residents, 1981-2008 (n = 2,310,466). Municipality of residence (Inuit-inhabited, First Nations-inhabited, rest of Québec) and language (Inuit, First Nations, French/English) were used to identify Inuit and First Nations births. The outcome was PTB (<37 completed weeks). Cox proportional hazards regression was employed to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of PTB, adjusting for maternal age, education, marital status, parity and birth year. RESULTS: PTB rates were higher for Inuit language speakers in Inuit-inhabited areas and the rest of Québec compared with French/English speakers in the rest of Québec, and disparities persisted over time. Relative to French/English speakers in the rest of Québec, Inuit language speakers in the rest of Québec had the highest risk of PTB (HR 1.98, 95% CI: 1.62-2.41). The risk was also elevated for Inuit language speakers in Inuit-inhabited areas, though to a lesser extent (HR 1.29, 95% CI: 1.18-1.41). In contrast, First Nations language speakers in First Nations-inhabited areas and the rest of Québec had similar or lower risks of PTB relative to French/English speakers in the rest of Québec. CONCLUSIONS: Inuit populations, especially those outside Inuit-inhabited areas, have persistently elevated risks of PTB, indicating a need for strategies to prevent PTB in this population.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.193
Threshold uncertainty score0.865

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Circumpolar HealthSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207