MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Code Red: Explaining Average Age of Death in the City of Hamilton

2015· article· en· W2178520753 on OpenAlexaffabout
Patrick F. DeLuca, Pavlos Kanaroglou

Bibliographic record

VenueAIMS Public Health · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensusCensus tractGeographyDemographyPovertyNewspaperZip codeGerontologyCartographyMedicineSociologyPolitical sciencePopulationMedia studiesLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study is to identify the underlying factors that explain the average age of death in the City of Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, as identified in the Code Red Series of articles that were published in the city's local newspaper in 2010. Using a combination of data from the Canadian Census, the Government of Ontario and the Canadian Institute for Health Information, factor analysis was performed yielding three factors relating to poverty, working class, and health and aging. In a regression analysis these factors account for 42% of the total variability in the average ages of death observed at the census tract level of geography within the city.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.456
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.232
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.181 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIMS Public HealthSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207