Infant mortality among First Nations versus non-First Nations in British Columbia: temporal trends in rural versus urban areas, 1981-2000
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Increasingly more First Nations (FN) people have moved from rural to urban areas. It is unknown how disparities in infant mortality among FN versus non-FN women have changed over time in urban versus rural areas. METHODS: We conducted a birth cohort-based study of all 877 925 live births (56 771 FN and 821 154 non-FN) registered in British Columbia, 1981-2000. Main outcomes included rates, risk differences, and relative risks of neonatal, postneonatal, and overall infant death. RESULTS: Both neonatal and postneonatal mortality rates for FN infants showed a steady decline in rural areas but a rise-and-fall pattern in urban areas. Relative risks for overall infant death among FN versus non-FN infants declined steadily from 2.75 (95% CI: 2.04, 3.72) to 1.87 (95% CI: 1.24, 2.81) in rural areas from 1981-1984 to 1997-2000, but rose from 1.59 (95% CI: 1.27, 1.99) (1981-1984) to 2.80 (2.33-3.37) (1989-92) and then fell to 1.89 (1.44-2.49) (1997-2000) in urban areas. Risk differences for neonatal death among FN versus non-FN infants declined substantially over time in rural but not urban areas. The disparities in neonatal death among FN versus non-FN were largely explained by differences in preterm birth, while the disparities in postneonatal death were not explained by observed maternal and pregnancy characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Reductions in disparities in infant mortality among FN versus non-FN women have been less substantial and consistent over time in urban versus rural areas of British Columbia, suggesting the need for greater attention to FN maternal and infant health in urban areas.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".