Change in Health Expectancy in the Canadian Population: 1994/95 - 2000/01
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With increasing life expectancy, lengthening working life may be an attractive idea for young seniors, as well as appealing to policymakers concerned with an increasing dependency ratio of non-workers to workers, if Canadians can expect to live in good health significantly beyond the age of retirement. Using a dichotomous health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measure such as prevalence of disability at 65 years to weight life-years lived, some studies find that disability levels are quite low and decreasing, suggesting that health expectancy at 65 is increasing. Using new longitudinal data from four cycles of the National Population Health Survey (NPHS), we test whether this trend is apparent for all age groups, and when using a polychotomous HRQOL measure such as Health Utility Index. As expected, health expectancy is still increasing for both sexes. These findings apply to both the younger and the older population, although to a much less extent to older females. We also found some compression of morbidity for males, but some expansion of morbidity for older females.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".