Cause-specific mortality by occupational skill level in Canada: a 16-year follow-up study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Mortality data by occupation are not routinely available in Canada, so we analyzed census-linked data to examine cause-specific mortality rates across groups of occupations ranked by skill level. METHODS: A 15% sample of 1991 Canadian Census respondents aged 25 years or older was previously linked to 16 years of mortality data (1991-2006). The current analysis is based on 2.3 million people aged 25 to 64 years at cohort inception, among whom there were 164 332 deaths during the follow-up period. Occupations coded according to the National Occupation Classification were grouped into five skill levels. Age-standardized mortality rates (ASMRs), rate ratios (RRs), rate differences (RDs) and excess mortality were calculated by occupational skill level for various causes of death. RESULTS: ASMRs were clearly graded by skill level: they were highest among those employed in unskilled jobs (and those without an occupation) and lowest for those in professional occupations. All-cause RRs for men were 1.16, 1.40, 1.63 and 1.83 with decreasing occupational skill level compared with professionals. For women the gradient was less steep: 1.23, 1.24, 1.32 and 1.53. This gradient was present for most causes of death. Rate ratios comparing lowest to highest skill levels were greater than 2 for HIV/AIDS, diabetes mellitus, suicide and cancer of the cervix as well as for causes of death associated with tobacco use and excessive alcohol consumption. CONCLUSION: Mortality gradients by occupational skill level were evident for most causes of death. These results provide detailed cause-specific baseline indicators not previously available for Canada.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".