MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113546671 · doi:10.1017/s0714980810000140

Social Determinants of Health for Older Women in Canada: Does Rural–Urban Residency Matter?

2010· article· fr· W2113546671 on OpenAlexaffabout
Deanna Wanless, Barbara Mitchell, Andrew Wister

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial determinants of healthGerontologyMedicineFamily medicinePsychologyPublic healthNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study provided an exploratory analysis of key social determinants of health for older Canadian women, with a focus on differences between rural and urban residency, given that socio-economic status (SES) and social capital have been shown to differ by rural-urban residence. Secondary analysis was conducted using the 2000/2001 Canadian Community Health Survey. A comparative logistic regression analysis revealed, unexpectedly, that SES and social capital variables were more strongly associated with the health status of urban older women than for the health status of their rural counterparts. Associations between health status measures and household income, food insecurity, and community belonging were largely not supported among rural women, but were for their urban counterparts. Findings are discussed concerning applications of the social-determinants-of-health model for explaining health patterns among older urban and rural women. Cost of living, access to health services, and dimensions of rural culture are discussed as potential explanations.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.353
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.260 · 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.

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

Citations59
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissementSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207