MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107436189 · doi:10.2105/ajph.2008.134940

Examining the Lag Time Between State-Level Income Inequality and Individual Disabilities: A Multilevel Analysis

2008· article· en· W2107436189 on OpenAlexaff
Tahany M. Gadalla, Esme Fuller‐Thomson

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Public Health · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniwersytet Medyczny im. Karola Marcinkowskiego w Poznaniu
KeywordsInequalityEconomic inequalityDemographyPopulationHealth equityDemographic economicsEconomicsPublic healthMedicineSociologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

State-level income inequality has been found to have an effect on individual health outcomes, even when controlled for important individual-level variables such as income, education, age, and gender. The effect of income inequality on health may not be immediate and may, in fact, have a substantial lag time between exposure to inequality and eventual health outcome. We used the 2006 American Community Survey to examine the association of state-level income inequality and 2 types of physical disabilities. We used 6 different lag times, ranging between 0 and 25 years, on the total sample and on those who resided in their state of birth. Income inequality in 1986 had the strongest correlation with 2006 disability levels. Odds ratios were consistently 10% higher for those born in the same state compared with the total population.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.252
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.147 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations26
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Public HealthSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207