MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2580393625

The influence of social determinants of health on child physical health in Greater Sudbury neighbourhoods

2016· dissertation· en· W2580393625 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kent Cox

Bibliographic record

VenueLu Zone Ul (Laurentian University) · 2016
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial determinants of healthChild healthEnvironmental healthPsychologyGeographyMedicineFamily medicinePublic healthNursing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is increasing awareness that social determinants of health are associated with growing health inequities, or avoidable differences, among many populations. The City of Greater Sudbury is experiencing these health inequities, including inequities in child physical health and wellbeing. This study will examine the relationship between specific social determinants of health and child physical health and wellbeing in Greater Sudbury neighbourhoods. The goals of this research are 1) to explore the relationships between specific social determinants of health and child physical health and wellbeing in Greater Sudbury neighbourhoods, 2) explore the collective influence of social determinants of health on child physical health and wellbeing, and 3) examine unique relationships that may exist between the social determinants of health and children physical health in neighbourhoods for the City of Greater Sudbury. The complexity, nature, and interactions of the social determinants of health within society makes observing them quantitatively difficult. This requires many different social determinants of health to be studied separately from one another, as well as together, in order to understand how they influence child physical health and wellbeing. In order to better understand these interactions, the social ecological model of health promotion presents an ideal theoretical framework for examining multiple variables and their correlations and, therefore, is used in this study. This study is an ecological crosssectional study using secondary data analysis of the 2011 National Household Survey (Statistics Canada) and the Early Development Instrument which was developed by the Offord Centre for Child Studies. This study involves a multi-variate analysis with the dependent variable of child physical health being represented by a composite measure of child physical health and wellbeing, and multiple independent variables including different measures of neighbourhood income, education, unemployment, lone-parent families and poverty. Child physical health and wellbeing is represented by the Early Development Instrument (EDI) - a questionnaire completed by the teacher or an Early Child Educator (ECE) when the child is in senior kindergarten. The EDI is a comprehensive measure of child physical health and wellbeing because it includes gross/fine motor skills, physical readiness for the school day, and physical independence. The social determinants of health are represented by the National Household Survey – a voluntary sample survey using a random sample collected by Statistics Canada, which the federal government uses to collect social and economic data about the Canadian population (Statistics Canada, 2011). IV Descriptive statistics address the assumptions of linear regression as well as examine the nature and normalcy of the independent and dependent variables. Then the presence of outliers are tested using univariate, bivariate, and multivariate detection methods. Linear and multiple regression tests are then used to analyze the influences of the social determinants of health on child physical health and wellbeing. The results of this study demonstrate the challenges of exploring geographical differences in the health of a population, and how those differences in health may be socially produced. Furthermore, this study provides insight into better understanding how child physical health and wellbeing in Greater Sudbury neighbourhoods may be influenced by socially produced health disparities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.357
Threshold uncertainty score0.718

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLu Zone Ul (Laurentian University)Same topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207