MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890461750 · doi:10.23889/ijpds.v3i4.1038

UK and Canadian Gulf War Veteran Mortality: Using A Fellow Military Cohort as a Comparison Population

2018· article· en· W2890461750 on OpenAlexaffabout
Elizabeth Rolland-Harris, Kate Harrison, Kristen Simkus, Lisa Baird, Kate Palmer, Dear Sandra, Linda VanTil

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Population Data Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHealth, Environment, Cognitive Aging
Canadian institutionsVeterans Affairs Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComparabilityCohortChristian ministryPopulationDemographyRecord linkageMedicineLinkage (software)Actuarial scienceEnvironmental healthPolitical scienceBusinessLawSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IntroductionTo compare 1990-91 Gulf War Veterans (GWV) survival outcomes with a comparable cohort, UK’s Ministry of Defence and Canada’s Department of National Defence combined data from their respective cohorts. The survival estimates/comparisons emanating from this collaboration will be novel as they will control for healthy worker/soldier effect (HW/SE).
 Objectives and ApproachGWV cohort building and record linkage methods used by Canada and the UK are described in more detail elsewhere. To ensure comparability in mortality outcomes between cohorts, the following steps will be conducted prior to analysis:
 
 ICD-9 causes of death (COD) will be recoded to ICD-10; recoding by each country will be cross-validated by the other, to ensure high inter-coder reliability;
 CODs will be analysed at the ICD-chapter level;
 
 Calculated age- and sex-specific rates will be directly standardized using the WHO 2012-2022 Standard Population. Cox proportional hazards will be used to compare survival between cohorts.
 ResultsWe are currently in the process of completing this exciting cross-sectoral linkage study and expect to have preliminary results to present. To our knowledge, this will be the first time that mortality outcomes for two discrete Gulf War veteran cohorts (ascertained by record linkage) will be analytically compared, rather than comparing to the general population. These findings will not only provide a more recent evaluation of the health status of GWV in Canada, but will also be a rare opportunity to control for the HW/SE, using comparisons with non-equivalent cohorts (e.g., general population, other deployment) cannot achieve.
 Conclusion/ImplicationsBeyond evidence of a strong inter-sectoral research relationship between military nations, these findings also represent a feasible solution to controlling for the HW/SE. The ability to control for this will mean more accurate UK and Canada GWV mortality/survival estimates than either country can generate on their own.

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)0.002
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 score0.191
Threshold uncertainty score0.903

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Population Data ScienceSame topicHealth, Environment, Cognitive AgingFrench-language works237,207