Comparing health status and access to health care in Canada’s largest metropolitan areas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstractResearch has shown persistent inequalities in access to health care between and within sociodemographic groups and geographic areas. Yet much of what we know about geographical disparities in access comes from studies of regional and urban/rural contrasts, or from studies of intra-urban, neighborhood-level variations. We know relatively little about variations in access to primary health care across different urban areas, and whether such variations translate into differences among residents' health. This study examines how health status and access to primary care vary across five of Canada's largest cities, paying particular attention to populations that may be particularly vulnerable based on age and income. Across all outcomes, there was a consistently strong relationship with individual socioeconomic status. We show that city of residence is important for access to health care but not for health status. Results are discussed in terms of their relevance for urban health-care policy and delivery, and impacts on health and access to care.Keywords: access to health caregeographies of healthurban healthlarge citiesinequality
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".