Life expectancy ranking of Canadians among the populations in selected OECD countries and its disparities among British Columbians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Canada is among the world's leading nations with the longest life expectancy at birth (LE0), and British Columbia (BC) ranks top among Canadian provinces and territories for LE0 in both men and women. This paper examined recent data as well as projected trends in LE0 of Canadian men and women and explored the geographic and socioeconomic disparities in LE0 specific to BC. METHODS: Using retrospective data on LE0 and age-standardized mortality rates, Canada was compared to 11 other Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries with the longest LE0. Projections were made using linear regression modelling to the year of 2023. The association between regional LE0 and regional socioeconomic status (SES) was examined for the province of BC using its Local Health Area (LHA) level data on SES and LE0. RESULTS: In 2009, Canadian men (LE0: 78.7 years) and women (LE0: 83.3 years) ranked 7(th) and 8(th), respectively among the 12 OECD nations under comparison. Significantly smaller annual gains in LE0 contributed to the losing of their top ranks in LE0 for Canadian men and women in recent years, which was projected to sustain. Higher mortality risks, particularly for lung cancer and external causes of mortality among women was found for Canada compared to leading countries on these measures. Geographic variations were evident in LE0 in BC, and there was a significant gap of 3.6 years in the average LE0 for BC's LHAs in the lowest SES tertile (78.6 years, 95% CI: 78.0-79.3) compared to those in the highest SES tertile (82.2 years, 95% CI: 81.6-82.8). CONCLUSIONS: Canada continues to remain one of the OECD countries with longest living population. With the highest LE0 in the country, British Columbia has an opportunity to address socio-economic disparities in LE0.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".