Predictors of Residential Mobility among Older Canadians and Impact on Analyses of Place and Health Relationships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to identify predictors of residential mobility in 55+ Canadians, to characterise neighbourhood changes following mobility, to assess whether such changes differ according to income, and to evaluate for cross-sectional estimations of place-health relationships the extent of bias associated with residential mobility. Using longitudinal data from the Canadian National Population Health Study (NPHS), residential mobility was operationalised by a change in postal code between two consecutive waves. Individuals' sociodemographic factors and neighbourhood characteristics were analysed in relation to mobility. Bias in cross-sectional estimations of place-health associations was assessed analysing neighbourhood-level deprivation and housing quality in relation to self-assessed health. Multiple age-related events were predictive of moving. Three out of 10 individuals moved at least once. Two thirds of movers experienced a change in neighbourhood type and such changes were not associated with income. No systematic biases in estimating place effects on health using cross-sectional data were observed. Given that individual-level socioeconomic status (SES) was neither a predictor of moving nor of its consequences in terms of neighbourhood type, controlling for SES could potentially lead to biased estimations of place-health associations. Results suggest that cross-sectional data can yield valid estimations of place-health associations among older adults.
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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".