MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2419596935 · doi:10.1080/00324728.2016.1190029

A cost of living longer: Projections of the effects of prospective mortality improvement on economic support ratios for 14 advanced economies

2016· article· en· W2419596935 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nick Parr, Jackie Li, Leonie Tickle

Bibliographic record

VenuePopulation Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLife expectancyCzechDemographic economicsEconomicsGeographyEast AsiaDevelopment economicsDemographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The economic implications of increasing life expectancy are important concerns for governments in developed countries. The aims of this study were as follows: (i) to forecast mortality for 14 developed countries from 2010 to 2050, using the Poisson Common Factor Model; (ii) to project the effects of the forecast mortality patterns on support ratios; and (iii) to calculate labour force participation increases which could offset these effects. The forecast gains in life expectancy correlate negatively with current fertility. Pre-2050 support ratios are projected to fall most in Japan and east-central and southern Europe, and least in Sweden and Australia. A post-2050 recovery is projected for most east-central and southern European countries. The increases in labour force participation needed to counterbalance the effects of mortality improvement are greatest for Japan, Poland, and the Czech Republic, and least for the USA, Canada, Netherlands, and Sweden. The policy implications are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.391 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePopulation StudiesSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207