MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033673953 · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2013.0518

Diabetes Associated With Early Labor-Force Exit: A Comparison Of Sixteen High-Income Countries

2014· article· en· W2033673953 on OpenAlexafffund
Juliet Rumball‐Smith, Douglas Barthold, Arijit Nandi, Jody Heymann

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Affairs · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreDouglas Mental Health University InstituteSmiths Detection (Canada)
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDiabetes mellitusMatching (statistics)MedicineInvestment (military)Demographic economicsDiseasePublic healthHealth and Retirement StudySurvey data collectionLabour economicsEconomicsGerontologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The economic burden of diabetes and the effects of the disease on the labor force are of substantial importance to policy makers. We examined the impact of diabetes on leaving the labor force across sixteen countries, using data about 66,542 participants in the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe; the US Health and Retirement Survey; or the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. After matching people with diabetes to those without the disease in terms of age, sex, and years of education, we used Cox proportional hazards analyses to estimate the effect of diabetes on time of leaving the labor force. Across the sixteen countries, people diagnosed with diabetes had a 30 percent increase in the rate of labor-force exit, compared to people without the disease. The costs associated with earlier labor-force exit are likely to be substantial. These findings further support the value of greater public- and private-sector investment in preventing and managing diabetes.

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)0.000
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.829

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.337 · 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

Citations86
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth AffairsSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207