Can Canadian Seniors on Public Pensions Afford a Nutritious Diet?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined whether Canada's public pensions (Old Age Security and Canada Pension Plan) provided adequate income for seniors living in Nova Scotia in 2005 to afford a basic nutritious diet. Monthly incomes were compared to essential monthly expenses for four household scenarios: (a) married couple, 80 years and 78 years, in urban Nova Scotia; (b) single male, 77 years in rural Nova Scotia; (c) a couple, 70 years and 65 years, in rural Nova Scotia; (d) widowed female, 85 years, in urban Nova Scotia. The monthly food costs for the four households were CAN$313.32, $193.83, $316.71, and $150.89, respectively. Results showed that both single-member households lacked the necessary funds for a nutritious diet, while living with a partner seemed to protect against inadequate financial resources. These findings illustrate the need to improve Canada's retirement systems to ensure all seniors have adequate financial resources to meet their basic needs-including nutritious food-prevent chronic disease, and ultimately improve quality of life.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".